SOHAN AND ORS. Vs. SARUP AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TO appreciate the point of law arising in these proceedings, the facts must be set out in some detail. Sohan Son of Jag Ram, Raja son of Mohan, Karta son of Kishan Lal, Surat Singh son of Ghandan and Kanshi Ram son of Shiv Ram instituted Revenue Suit No. 170 of 1946 in the Ct. of the Assistant Collector, 1st Grade, Karnal District, against Sarup Singh, son of Sardara, Rati Ram son of Harjas, Jai Chand son of Phul Singh, Gordhan son of Ram Jas, Bakhtawar son of Nathu and Bholar son of Mugla of village Mandi, Tehsil Sanipat for the recovery of Rs. 52 being their one -fifth share in the rent of the shamilat fields known as "Chauwala" measuring 64 bighas and 16 biswas. Defts. 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 contested the suit and on the pleadings of the parties the Assistant Collector fixed the following issues:

(2.) ON issue No. 1 the Assistant Collector found that the pltfs. were co -sharers in the shamilat and had one -fifth share in the shamilat. On Issue No. 2 the Assistant Collector found that the pltfs. were entitled to recover Rs. 52 from the defts. Defts. did not appeal from the order passed by the Assistant Collector in Revenue Suit No. 170 of 1946.

(3.) FROM the decree passed by the trial Ct. on 20 -7 -1948, pltfs. appealed in the Ct. of the Senior Subordinate Judge, Karnal. In deciding the appeal the Senior Subordinate Judge has found that the decision of the Revenue Ct. does not operate as res judicata to the trial of civil Suit No. 62 of 1948 and setting aside the judgment and the decree of the trial Ct. has remanded the suit for trial on merits. From the order of remand passed by the Ct. of first appeal on 21 -2 -1949, defts. have come up in appeal under Rule 1(u) of Order 43, Civil P.C.