JYOTINDRA MOHAN CHAKRABARTY Vs. KANAI MAHTO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The judgment of the lower Appellate Court is a judgment of reversal, and the learned the Advocate for the respondent has practically found it impossible to support it, though he has naturally had to refrain from admitting anything and has done his best to support it. The suit was for a declaration that the plaintiffs were entitled to direct possession of a 6 annus 8 gandas share in a bandh or tank, as regards which the Record-of-Rights showed that the defendant was a raiyat, with inter alias 4 annas interest created in 1921 by a patta granted by Balaram Goswami, one of the three men that were bought out by the plaintiffs in 1916 but forcibly remained in possession. The defendant also put forward a patta of 1923 in respect of another 4 annas in the same bandh executed by Jagannath Goswami, another of the three judgment-debtors of the plaintiffs. The defendant's case was that the bandh was the ancestral raiyati holding, and that the pattas he took from the Goswamis which are referred to in the Record-of-Rights, were merely confirmatory pattas.

(2.) The learned Munsif gave detailed reasons for disbelieving the defendant's case and held that the Record-of-Rights was wrong so far as the plaintiff's share in the bandh was concerned.

(3.) Babu Jatindra Nath Ghosh, the learned Subordinate Judge who heard the appeal and arrived at a different conclusion, observes in the first place that: the documents (Exs. Nos 1 to 4) relied on by the plaintiffs do not prove in any way that the plaintiffs purchased any share of the tank in dispute.