HARDIAL Vs. ALAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for recovery of certain crops, or, in the alternative, the value thereof. The plaintiff's allegation was that he had sown wheat, lahi, and mustard in 4 bighas of alluvial land bearing No. 169, that the defendants Nos. 1 to 9, having colluded with the Patwari, the defendant No. 10, forcibly cut away the crops sown by the plaintiffs about the 20 of March 1941. The defendant No. 10 is the Patwari of the village and was to receive one- tenth of the crops to be appropriated by defendants Nos. 1 to 9. The plaintiff again sowed some wheat, etcetera, on another plot of 7 bighas but the defendants Nos. 1 to 9 in collusion with defendant No. 10 cut and removed the crops. The plaintiff, therefore, brings the suit for recovery of the grain removed by the defendants or Rs. 347 the value thereof.

(2.) The defence of the defendants Nos. 1 to 9 was that they had been ploughing and sowing the field in question as it emerged from the river every year and had always been reaping the crops, that in the year in dispute they ploughed and sowed it as usual under a lease of Bhadon Sambat 1977 given by Shah Qutubuddin, the lambardar end that the plaintiff had never sowed the field in question nor had he any right to the crops. They also contended that there was no collusion between them and the defendant No. 10.

(3.) Defendant No. 10 denied any collusion with the other defendants and alleged that the defendants themselves sowed the crops and reaped them.