DALJIT Vs. KACHERU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a second appeal arising out of a suit instituted by the plaintiff under the provisions of Section 44, Agra Tenancy Act.

(2.) The plaintiff alleged that under a registered deed of 14 June 1927, an arrangement had been arrived at between him and the defendant under which certain plots were divided between them. The plaintiff's case was that by virtue of this agreement he became the owner of the plots in suit, and the defendant was holding them without his consent and was in possession as a trespasser. The defendant resisted the claim. He pleaded that as after the execution of the aforesaid deed there had been no partition of plots through the Revenue Court, the plaintiff was not entitled to maintain the suit. The suit was thrown out by the learned Assistant Collector who tried it. Against his decree there was an appeal to the District Judge of Agra who came to the conclusion that the plaintiff was entitled to a decree and he accordingly decreed the appeal.

(3.) The principal question for consideration in this appeal is whether an appeal to the Court of the District Judge was competent. In order to decide the question we have to bear in mind that we find that the deed was executed by the parties under the terms of which the plots in suit were allotted to the plaintiff. The effect of the deed was that the parties exchanged some plots among themselves. They were co-sharers before but under the terms of the deed each of them agreed to hold certain plots exclusively. The deed was registered and it conferred a title upon the plaintiff in respect of the plots. The position of the defendant after the execution of the deed was that he was holding the plots without the consent of the landholder and his possession was that of a mere trespasser who was liable to be ejected under the provisions of Section 44, Agra Tenancy Act.