JOHAN URAON EKKA Vs. SITARAM SAO BHAGAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is defendants' second appeal. Their father Nirbandh Oraon was recorded in the last revisional survey and settlement records, which were finally published in 1935, as a sikmi raiyat (under-raiyat) in respect of plot No. 240, the sikmi khata being khata No. 20 under the raiyati khata No. 77 in village Naro. The plaintiffs are admittedly the occupancy raiyats of khata No. 77. Nirbandh Oraon died in 1945. The plaintiffs served defendants with a notice to quit and demanded possession. On their refusal to give up possession, the present suit was brought for their eviction on the grounds that they were mere tenants-at-will and that their tenancy had been determined and, therefore, they had no right to remain upon the land and the plaintiffs were legally entitled to re-enter.

(2.) The defendants contested the suit and denied that they were tenants-at-will. They asserted that they had acquired permanent occupancy right in the disputed land, i.e., in plot No. 240 and that they had inherited this land from their father, Nirbandh Oraon, and they were not liable to eviction.

(3.) The [earned Munsif held that Nirbandh Oraon was an under-raiyat and had not acquired permanent occupancy right He alternatively held that, even if Nirbandh had acquired occupancy right, this right did not devolve on his death on the defendants since such a right was not heritable except by custom and that no such custom had been established. He held, therefore, that the defendants were mere trespassers and granted the plaintiffs a decree for possession.