TAPESARA KUER Vs. KALAP RAJWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal, by defendant No. 1, is directed against the concurrent decisions of the courts below decreeing the suit of the plaintiff respondent.

(2.) The plaintiff's case was that he took settlement of the disputed land from Mangal Prasad Singh, the original Malik of the disputed land, about 25 years back, on the basis of a sada patta, on payment of nazarana, and since the settlement he was in continuous possession of the disputed land till he was forcibly dispossessed by the appellant about four years back. The plaintiffs further case was that the sada patta was lost, but he paid regularly rent, and got receipts from Man-gal Prasad, and his nephew Mathura, who was malik after the death of Mangal. He further pleaded that there was a partition between Mathura and Jadunath, by virtue of which the disputed land fell to the share of Jadunath, defendant 2, and the plaintiff paid rent to him also regularly, but he did not grant him any receipt, and he set up defendant 1, the appellant to claim the suit land, as against the plaintiff.

(3.) The suit was contested by the appellant only. Her case was that she took settlement of the disputed land from Jadunath, defendant 2, on 18-3-41, under a patta, and since then she was coming in possession of the land, and she has been regularly paying rent for the same to him. The first court found that the plaintiff had been able to prove his title to the suit land by being in continuous possession over it for more than 25 years prior to the date of his alleged dispossession, and as such the plaintiff having acquired perfect title to the suit land before the alleged settlement by Jadunath in favour of the appellant, the settlement in favour of the defendant was illegal and ineffective, and the defendant had acquired no right under it. On these findings the learned Munsiff decrees the plaintiff's suit.