JANKI Vs. DEBI SHANKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a defendants appeal arising out of a suit for ejectment. The plaintiffs allegations were that they were occupancy tenants of five plots; and that in a suit for rent in the Revenue Courts the defendants had set up a title in themselves as occupancy tenants and had thus forfeited the tenancy. This was in 1913 and related to plot No. 1350. The Revenue Court dismissed the suit. When the plaintiffs again sued the defendants in 1916 for arrears of rent of three plots, that suit was also dismissed on the same ground. The present suit was then brought in the Civil Court to eject the defendants as trespassers.

(2.) One of the pleas raised in defense was that such a suit did not lie in the Civil Courts. The parties are descended from a common ancestor,

(3.) The plaintiff's case was that one of the co-sharere, Durga, had transferred his share in the holding to them. The defendants also claimed title under Durga. The Revenue Court had held that Durga was not a co-sharer of the plaintiffs in the plots in dispute and, therefore, any transfer by Durga to them of his share in the holding would not be valid The First Court agreed with the Revenue Court in holding that Durga was not a co-sharer of the plaintiffs and hence he could not relinquish his rights to the plaintiffs. He also found that the plaintiffs were not occupancy tenants and dismiss. ed the suit. The lower Appellate Court came to the opposite conclusion and held that Durga was a co-sharer with the plaintiffs and that the transfer was valid Ha accordingly decreed the ejectment of the defendants.