LAWS(PVC)-1933-11-16

THAKUR KURMI Vs. LALJI MISSER

Decided On November 13, 1933
THAKUR KURMI Appellant
V/S
LALJI MISSER Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One Mt. Lakhrupi Kuer gave zarpeshgi lease of some lands including the land in suit to defendant 2. The plaintiff Lalji Missir purchased these lands from the Musammat and then redeemed the zarpeshgi. Later on he instituted the present suit on the allegation that after the redemption of the zarpeshgi defendants 1 and 2 dispossessed him from the land in suit which was in the sir possession of the Musammat and after the lease in possession of defendant 2. Defendant 2 did not appear, but defendant 1 contested the suit claiming an occupancy right in the land under a settlement made with him about 30 years ago by Mt. Reji Kuer, mother of Mt. Lakhrupi Kuer.

(2.) The learned Munsif, mainly relying upon the revisional survey records and upon the rent receipts produced by defendant 1, dismissed the suit. On appeal by the plaintiff the learned Subordinate Judge reversed the decision and decreed the suit. Defendant 1 has appealed. The learned Subordinate Judge relied upon the zarpeshgi deed executed by Mt. Lakhrupi Kuer in favour of defendant 2 in which the land in suit was treated as bakasht and then believed the evidence of the plaintiffs witnesses that during the time when the land was in the zarpeshgi lease of defendant 2 it was in his direct cultivation.

(3.) He also held that the Exs. A series (the receipts) were fabricated. Two points are urged before me: one is that the zarpeshgi deed in question does not show the land to be bakasht. It is true that it does not show this directly, but I think the learned Subordinate Judge's inference is correct. The deed purported to give in zarpeshgi two classes of lands: one in possession of the raiyats and the other zirat.