BHAGIRATH SHARMA Vs. JIBLAL PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiff No. 1 is appellate No. 1. The suit was filed for declaration of his title for confirmation of his possession. Further the plaintiffs prayed for a decree that the respondent Nos. 1 to 5 had forfeited their right to continue as lessee of the suit property. Prayer was also made for permanent injunction restraining respondent Nos. 1 to 5 from ejecting appellant No. 1 and realising any rent from him. The respondent Nos. 2 to 8 were made plaintiffs but no relief was prayed on their behalf.

(2.) The trial Court, on the basis of the evidence led by the parties, decreed the suit. Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 filed an appeal before the Court below. The Court below allowed the same and dismissed the suit.

(3.) The admitted facts are that Khata No. 21 plot No. 6/648, total area measuring 0.82, acres was recorded in the survey in the name of Nazir Ali Nazir Ali made various transfers of different areas of this plot to different persons. According to the plaint, Balgovind Singh took six kathas of land out of this plot in the name of SaloTurin. However the trial Court has found that the settlement was taken by Salo Turin. Facts which are not disputed are that on 10-10-1928 Salo Turin had transferred her interest to Matnta Prasad. On 25-4-1932 Kampta Prasad sold his interest to Bibi Kadiran. On 5-1-1946 Bibi Kadiran sold her interest to Bassantilal Halwai. On 5-1-1953 Basantilal Halwai transferred his interest to his wife Parvati Devi. On 2-5-1953 there was a proceeding under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure between Basantilal Halwai and the descendants of Nazir Ali with regard to the suit properties which was ultimately dropped. On 1-4-1961 Parvati Devi leased out the suit properties to appellant No. 1 on monthly rent of Rs. 10 On 14-4-1961 appellant No. 1 complained to Parvati Devi that she had not put him in possession of the properties. Parvati Devi assured that he would be put in possession but the rent was enhanced to Rs. 30. On 29-11-1961 Barvati Devi issued a notice terminating the tenancy of appellant No. 1. When appellant No. 1 did not vacate the property she filed a suit for his eviction which was registered as title suit No. 51 of 1962 in the Court of Munsif Giridih. Immediately after the notice 29-11-1962 by which Parvati Devi had terminated the tenancy to appellant and the descendants of Nazir Ali, namely, Sarfuddin and others sold suit land to appellant on 2-12-1981. On 20-3-1962 Parvati filed the title suit in Court of Munsif, Giridih, for the eviction of appellant No. 1, The suit was decreed by the trial Court. Appellant No. 1 filed an appeal challenging the decree of the trial Court, but the same was dismissed. The appeal filed by appellant No. 1 in this Court was also dismissed. However, in that suit, the trial Court and the appellate Court held that the question of paramount title to the suit property by the heirs of Nazir Ali was not before the Court in that suit. The High Court confirmed that finding of the trial Court as well as of the appellant Court. It may be mentioned that in that suit, appellant No. 1 claimed his title by virtue of the transfer made by the defendants of Nazir Ali to him on 2-12-1961 but as the heirs of Nazir Ali were not party to that suit, the Court did not go into the question of paramount title as stated in the judgments of the trial Court, appellate Court and also the High Court in that suit.