MOTILAL Vs. NANULAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this second appeal the defendant has prayed for transfer of this appeal to the revenue court under sec. 3 of the Jaipur Tenancy Act (No. XXIV of 1945) and Jaipur State Grants Land Tenures Act (I of 1947 ). The respondent has contested that the case is triable by a civil court.

(2.) THE plaintiff Nanulal filed a suit in the court of the Munsif, Jaipur East, for Rs. 360/- against Motilal on the allegation that village Ladpura was granted by the State to Amar Chand, one of the ancestors of the parties. Amarchand had three sons, Hukamchand, Uttamchand, and Chimanlal. THE Village Ladpura was, therefore, divided in three shares among the three sons of Amarchand. In addition to the village Ladpura, Amarchand also acquired two wells in the village Newta, which were also divided among the three sons of Amarchand. THE plaintiff and the defendant are the descendants of Hukamchand and are entitled to one-half share each out of the one-third share of Hukamchand of the village Ladpura and the two wells in the village Newta. THE plaintiff had obtained a declaratory decree from a competent court regarding partition of Hukamchand's share between himself and the defendant, by which the plaintiff was declared to be entitled to one half share. THE eldest male member in the line of the three sons of Amarchand enjoys the status of a Matmidar. In the line of Hukamchand the defendant is the Matmidar. THE three Matmidars of village Ladpura entered into a contract regarding the management of the revenues of the village Ladpura and the two wells in the village Newta, by which each Matmidar undertook to manage the village Ladpura for six years at a time and the two wells in the Newta for seven years at a time paying to the other Matmidars, in lieu of their shares of profits, Rs. 202/- each relating to the profits of the village Ladpura and 11 Mounds of grain relating to the profits of the two wells of Newta. In pursuance of this agreement one of the Matmidars, Gulabchand, took over the management of the village Ladpura from Sialu of the Sambat year 1997 and the defendant undertook the management of the two wells in the village Newta from Unhalu of the Sambat year 1997. THE plaintiff claimed Rs. 202/- and Rs. 8/- as interest thereon for the Sambat years 1999 and 2000 on account of the profits of the village Ladpura of his half share as determined by the terms of the contract referred to above, and for Rs. 150/-being the price of 16-1/2 Mounds of grain and 12 seers of Zira relating to the profits of the two wells in the village Newta for Sambat years 1998 to 2000 on the allegation that rents and profits of the share of the plaintiff were collected by the defendant.