BIRENDRA BIKRAM SINGH Vs. BRIJ MOHAN PANDE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals (consolidated by order of the Chief Court of Oudh) are from two decrees of the said Chief Court dated 21 July 1930, which reversed two decrees of the Subordinate Judge of Gonda dated 15 July 1929. There were two suits, Nos. 86 and 89 of 1928. In suit No. 86 the plaintiffs were Basdeo, Ram Ujagar and Ram Samujh and the defendant was the appellant to His Majesty in Council, viz., Raja Bikram Singh. There were two other persons joined as defendants in that Suit as they also had brought suits for pre- emption. It is not necessary to refer further to the second and third defendants, who did not appear in the Chief Court or on the appeal to His Majesty in Council. In suit 89 of 1923 the plaintiff was Brij Mohan Pande and the defendant was the abovementioned appellant, Raja Bikram Singh. In each case a claim for pre- emption under the Oudh Laws Act of 1876 of certain property was made by the plaintiffs against Raja Bikram Singh. The Subordinate Judge of Gonda dismissed both the suits. The plaintiffs appealed to the Chief Court of Oudh which allowed the appeals and made decrees in favour of the plaintiffs for pre-emption.

(2.) From the said decrees of the Chief Court, Raja Bikram Singh appealed to His Majesty in Council. At the hearing before the Board the plaintiffs in suit 86 of 1928, viz., Basdeo, Ram Ujagar and Ram Samujh appeared by their learned counsel: The plaintiff in suit 89 of 1928, viz., Brij Mohan Pande, did not appear. The material facts are as follows: -The appellant, Raja Bikram Singh, by a deed, dated the 28 August, 1927, purchased from Bishan Narain Bhargara what is called a taluqdari mahal consisting of 163 villages. The purchase was carried out through the Court of Wards, which at the time of the purchase had superintendence of the person and property of Raja Bikram Singh, and the consideration for the purchase of the taluqdari mahal was five and a half lakhs of rupees (Rs. 5,50,000). According to the judgment of the Chief Court, the taluq, which was the subject matter of the deed of the 28 August, 1927, is known as the Bamhnipair taluq, which was settled both in the first summary settlement of 1858 and in the subsequent regular settlement with Rani Sarfaraz Kuar, the widow of Raja Indarjet Singh. The estate seems to have received from time to time different names, but it has always been treated as a taluqdari mahal and the rights which were purchased by the Court of Wards on behalf of the appellant Raja were those of the superior proprietor in the group of villages forming the revenue paying mahal.

(3.) As already stated, the taluq contained 163 villages, but the suit 86 of 1928 related to one village only, viz., Bakrauli, which consisted of four hamlets and the plaintiffs in that suit claimed pre-emption of that village on payment of Rs. 9703 or the amount which should be adjudged by the Court. The suit 89 of 1928 also related to one village only, viz., Patijia Buzurg, and the plaintiff, Brij Mohan Pande, claimed pre-emption in respect thereof on payment of Rs. 8634 or the amount which should be adjudged by the Court. It is to be noted that the plaintiffs in both suits did not claim as co-sharers but as persons who had what are called under-proprietary rights in the villages of which they claimed to obtain possession by means of pre-emption. Both the Courts in India hold that the property conveyed by the sale deed is a single proprietary mahal for which the proprietor had contracted to pay a definite sum by way of land revenue to the Government, though each of the villages in the mahal was separately assessed to land revenue.