KARNODHAR HALDAR Vs. HARI PROSAD RAI CHOWDHURY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal raises a point of some interest, and notwithstanding the ingenious argument of Mr. Matter, hold that the appellant is entitled to succeed.

(2.) The case arises in this way : The present defendant .brought a suit to recover possession of lands from which, he said, he had been wrongfully ousted, lie obtained a decree in his favour for recovery of possession, and that decree was ultimately confirmed by the High Court. As yet the plaintiff in that suit, who is the defendant in this, has taken no steps to execute his decree and it does not appear that he has even threatened to execute it. But the present plaintiffs have commenced this suit whereby they pray to have it declared that the defendant had no title to the lands in suit, to establish that they are not bound by the decree of the title Suit No. 135 of 1903, for perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from taking possession of the lands in suit by executing the decree of title Suit No. 135 of 1903, and for damages.

(3.) The Munsif has granted the plaintiffs prayer for an injunction to the extent of restraining the defendant from taking khas possession of the lands in suit, as he is the plaintiffs tenant; and, that decree has been confirmed by the lower appellate Court and afterwards by Mr. Justice Caspersz on appeal to this Court, and it is from this judgment of Mr. Justice Caspersz that the present appeal is preferred tons under the Letters Patent.