MT SHAKAL KUER Vs. PARMANAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These matters arise out of a suit by the plaintiffs to recover 9 annas 1 dam 7 cowries odd share in mauza Maulangar, alleging that this share which was ijmal had been sold on 23 March 1925 under Section 13, Revenue Sale Law, for arrears of revenue in respect of that share and had been purchased by plaintiff 1 who had in turn sold 8 annas out of it to plaintiffs 2--4. The plaintiffs say that when they went to take khas possession they were resisted by the defendants on the allegation that they (the defendants) held mukarrari interest in the share. The lower Court granted a decree evicting the defendants who now appeal. Appeal No. 135 of 1930 is that of defendants 5--22, 24--26, 31,36--49and 52--54, who claim 8 annas 16 dams 18 cowries odd mukarrari interest in the ijmali share, and the decision of this matter will govern all the others.

(2.) Minor circumstances affecting the other matters will be dealt with at the conclusion of this judgment. The following facts are material for this decision: The whole tauzi originally belonged as to 12 annas to one Saif Ali and as to 4 annas to another person, which latter share was made the subject of a separate account with which we are not concerned. Out of his 12 annas share, Saif Ali in 1867 granted what the defendants contend to be a mukarrari lease of 9 annas in favour of seven persons, a share being allotted to each. These persons are the predecessors of certain of the defendants. At the same time Saif Ali made a similar grant of one anna share to another person who is the predecessor of the other defendants. As to the remaining two annas in his possession Saif Ali sold them to his two sons who also on Saif Alis death inherited the proprietary interest in the other 10 annas remaining in him after his mukarrari grants.

(3.) Upon certain defendants shares in the proprietary right have devolved, upon some others of share in the mukarrari right has devolved, and yet others seem to be interested as proprietors and also as mukarraridars. Several separate accounts were opened for the payment of revenue, and a 9 annas 1 dam odd share was left in ijmal, of which 8 annas 16 dams odd share was subject to the mukarrari and 4 dams, 9 cowries was free from mukarrari. This ijmali share fell into arrears of Government revenue and was put up for sale when it fetched Rs. 710 from plaintiff 1. The defendants interested in the mukarrari originally granted by Saif Ali refer to Section 54, Revenue Sale Law, and contend that the purchaser must take the share purchased subject to the encumbrance of the mukarrari and that the mukarraridars could not therefore be disturbed in their possession.