(1.) THIS is an appeal against the decision of the Additional Commissions Jaipur dated 31. 1. 56 filed by the defendant against whom the suit for recovery of arrears of rent for Svt. years 2008 and 2009 was dismissed by the trial court, the appellate court having decreed the same.
(2.) WE have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the record as well. The facts of the case are that the plaintiff-respondents filed a suit in the court of the Assistant Collector, Karauli on 29. 4. 1954 with the allegation that the land in dispute was given for cultivation to the defendant in Svt. year 2004 for three years for an annual rent of Rs. 2007- ; that he paid the rent for Svt. 2004 and 2005 and when he failed to pay rent for Svt. years 2036 and 2007, a suit for arrears was filed which was decreed, the decree being upheld in two appeals as well, that the decretal amount was recovered, that the defendant again failed to pay the rent for Svt. years 2008 and 2009 and therefore, the plaintiffs had to bring the present suit. The claim was denied by the defendant appellant with the plea that he had surrendered the land in Svt. 2006, that the land under dispute, was in muafi of the respondents, that it had been resumed by the Jagirdar as the respondents failed to render service or pay the annual khandi, and that since 2006 the Jagirdar had been cultivating the same, The trial court held that the land under dispute having been resumed by the thikana and taken over, the appellant cannot be held liable for the rent and dismissal the suit. The appellate court held that it has not been proved that the Muafi has been resumed by the Thikana Amargarh and the appellant being the Kamdar of the thikana had joined hands with the jagirdar in depriving the respondents of the benefit of land under dispute and as no surrender or relinquishment of the land had been established, the suit of the respondents was decreed. It is against this judgment and decree of the lower appellate court that an appeal has been filed before us.