FAUJDAR RAI Vs. SITA RAM TIWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question raised in this second appeal is whether the custom of preemption upon which the plaintiff relied was proved.

(2.) The only document put forward in proof of this custom was a wajib-ul-arz which was prepared in the year 1909, after a partition had taken place in the village. It seems to be the case that when partition is made it is the duty of the Collector or Assistant Collector to prepare a fresh record of rights. This, as is pointed out by the learned Counsel for the respondent, was laid down in the case reported in I.L.R., 22 All., 1.

(3.) We take it, therefore, that this wajib-ul-arz prepared in the year 1909 can be looked at for the purpose of ascertaining whether it records a custom.