SYED ATA HUSAIN Vs. RAMMAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arisesfout of a suit for arrears of rent brought in the Revenue Court by the plaintiff Ata Husain against Ramman Lal, defendant, and others. The rent claimed was for the years 1324, 1325 and 1326 Fasli. The land in respect of which the rent was claimed formed the occupancy holding of one Musammat Katwari. The plaintiff alleges himself to be the mortgagee of the holding from Mt. Katwari, and he said in his plaint that the defendant was his sub-tenant and was, therefore, liable to pay him rent The defendant Ramman Lal denied that the relationship of landlord and tenant existed between the plaintiff and him. He asserted that he had taken the land from Mt. Katwari and that he bad paid the rent claimed to the latter. There can be no doubt that Mt. Katwari was incompetent to mortgage her occupancy holding and that the alleged mortgage in favour of the plaintiff is void in law. Therefore, the plaintiff has no right to the land in suit.

(2.) The lower Appellate Court held this to be one of the grounds on which the plaintiff's suit was bound to fail. That Court further found that the defendant had paid the rent sued for by the plaintiff to Mt. Katwari and that the defendant was not the plaintiff's tenant. That Court dismissed the suit.

(3.) The plaintiff appealed to this Court and his appeal was dismissed by a learned Judge of this Court.