DULARI SINGH Vs. BIJENDRA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Section 25 of the Small Cause Courts Act. Petitioners 1 and 2 executed two rehan deeds on the 28th May 1960, in favour of the plaintiff-opposite party for Rs. 1300/- each. On the 8th March, 1961, they sold the ijara lands to one Ramlagan Singh for Rs. 3900/- and out of the consideration money left in deposit a sum of Rs. 2600/- with the purchaser to be paid to the rehandar. On the 8th of June 1961, Ram-lagan Singh deposited the mortgage money under Section 83 of the Transfer of Property Act, and notice of the deposit was served on the opposite party. On the 12th July, 1961, the opposite party withdrew the money after giving a registered receipt (Ext. B), as required by Section 83 of the Transfer of Property Act. Thereafter, on the 7th October, 1961, the opposite party filed a Small Cause Court suit against the petitioners, out of which the present applica-tion arises for compensation on the ground that he never got possession of the ijara lands during the continuance of the ijara. The plea taken in defence by the petitioners was that the opposite party was all along in possession. The learned Small Cause. Court Judge, however, found that the plaintiff was never given possession, and as such he was entitled to. compensation, and decreed the suit as claim-ed. Being thus aggrieved, the present application has been filed in this court.

(2.) Mr. Daso Sinha, appearing for the petitioners, has contended that the learned Small Cause Court Judge has not given any consideration to the statements made by the opposite party in the registered receipt Ext. B, and he has brushed it aside on a flimsy ground. In my opinion, there is much substance in this contention. Ext. B recites in clear terms that the opposite party was in possession of the ijara land from the date of the execution of tha two rehan deeds as a rehandar up to the date of the execution of document, and that nobody else was in possession thereof. It also recites that he withdrew his possession as rehandar from the ijara lands, and that he had no claim left as against the petitioners with respect to any matter concerning the rehan deeds or the money due under them, and undertook not to prefer any claim for the same. On execution of this dccument, the opposite party was allowed to withdraw the money. This document has been disposed of by the learned Small Cause Court Judge sunvnarily as under :

(3.) Section 83 of the Transfer of Property Act reads thus :