PRASANNA RAM PATHAK Vs. BALABOX AGARWALLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against the decision of the learned A. D. C., Kamrup, dated 4th March 1947, by which he ordered that the annual patta should remain in the name of Balabox Agarwalla and refused to recognise the possession of the present appellant.

(2.) Mr. Lahkar for the appellant has contended that it has been found as a fact that the appellant was in possession of the land, although the respondent was nominally the patta-holder, and having regard to the long possession of the appellant, the patta should have been granted to him and that the name of the respondent should have been removed from the patta.

(3.) There is no substance in the contention. An annual patta, until it is either cancelled or notice of non-renewal given to the patta-holder by the authorities concerned, confers good title upon the person to whom the patta is issued. The possession of a person other than the annual patta-holder is irrelevant. His possession might be that of a trespasser or a permissive possession emanating from the patta-holder himself in which case obviously he cannot claim the rights of a patta-holder and claim that the annual patta be issued to him.