MOHESHWAR SINGH Vs. JAGESHWAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals arise out of six suits instituted by the plaintiff-appellant for realization of arrears of rent and for ejectment of the defendants from their holdings. The plaintiff's case was that the defendants in each of the six suits were given settlement of separate pieces of land under certain kabuliats; that they had defaulted payment of rent for the years 1332 to the 12 annas kist of 1335; that as they were temporary tenants and had made default in payment of rent, they were liable to ejectment.

(2.) The claim therefore was for arrears of rent for the years indicated above and for ejectment of the defendants. The defence of the defendants was that although separate kabuliats were execrated by the defendants in the six suits, yet as a matter of fact the entire area covered by all the six suits, namely 97 bighas odd, was settled only with one of the defendants Sadho Singh who was the defendant in suit No. 3234 of 1928 which has given rise to Second Appeal No. 192 of 1931, and that the other defendants executed kabuliats merely as benamidars for Sadho Singh; that Sadho Singh got a permanent settlement under the kabuliats and not a temporary settlement. They further alleged that on account of interference on the part of the plaintiff, the tenants were unable to cultivate the land peacefully in the years in suit and that therefore there ought to be a suspension of rent in respect of all the years in suit.

(3.) The Munsif found that the settlements were separately made with each of the defendants in each of the suits and that it had not been established that there was one settlement in respect of all the lands constituting one holding of Sadho Singh, the defendant in one of these suits. He further found that the evidence on the record was not sufficient to show that the holdings were subsequently consolidated with the consent of the landlord. This finding of the Munsif has been affirmed by the learned District Judge on appeal.