BANKALA VITTIL USMAN KOYA Vs. CHIDRIAMOKKAUSA AKOTH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The 1 plaintiff granted to the 1 defendant a lease of certain land for 6 years. On the expiration of the six years the plaintiff sued the defendants for recovery of possession of the land, rent and mesne profits.

(2.) The 1 defendant set up the defence that the land was not the property of the 1 plaintiff but the property of Government and that in 1893 he had accepted a putta from Government comprising the land in question. The Lower Courts were of opinion that on the facts, the 1 defendant had established a good defence to the plaintiff's suit. The ordinary rule of course is that a tenant is estopped from denying the title of the landlord who let him into possession.

(3.) Mr. Rosario on behalf of the 1 defendant did not attempt to support the judgment of the Lower Appellate Court on the ground taken by the District Judge. But his argument was that admitting the 1 plaintiff's title to the property in 1891 that title was determined in 1893.