KEDAR PANDEY Vs. KEDAR NATH SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these two appeals, a common question of law arises, namely, whether the settlements made with the plaintiff-appellant by the Manager appointed under the Chota Nagpur Encumbered Estates Act are invalid on the ground that the Commissioner has not accorded his sanction to the same.

(2.) The plaintiff brought the suits alleging that, on 14-1-1943, the Manager appointed under the Chota Nagpur Encumbered Estates Act made a permanent settlement of 25.24 acres of land in village Ursaugi of Palamau District after taking salami. The land belonged to one Kedar Nath Singh, defendant 1 in Title Suit No. 115 of 1944, In the other title suit, namely, Title Suit No. 116 of 1944, the plaintiff alleged that he took Settlement of 11.36 acres of land from the Manager appointed under the Chota Nagpur Encumbered Estates Act, The land belonged to defendants 1 to 8 of this title suit. It is the case of the plaintiff that parwana was issued, and possession was delivered to him by the Manager of the encumbered estate.

(3.) The defendant-proprietors contested the respective suits mainly on the ground that the Manager appointed under the Chota Nagpur Encumbered Estates Act had no authority to make permanent settlement of the lands in favour of the plaintiff. It -was said that the Commissioner did not accord his sanction before settlements were made, and there was a violation of Rule 16 of the rules made under the Chota Nagpur Encumbered Estates Act.