ANAND PRASAD SINGH Vs. MEDNI PRASAD SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal arises out of a suit for recovery of possession of certain land. There were two sets of plaintiffs. One set were persons, who had, since 1860 or earlier, been the owners of a three gandas interest in the revenue-paying estate, bearing tauzi No. 1070 on the roll of the Collector of Darbhanga. Between 1885 and 1895, these persons or their predecessors in interest acquired, by purchase or exchange, a number of occupancy holdings. The land in suit formed part of these holdings, and was, subsequently, settled by the plaintiffs first-party with the plaintiffs second-party. There was more than one settlement, the earliest being, apparently, made in or about 1917, and the others sometime after 1923 and before 1930. The whole of the land and other lands were lands appertaining to a number of revenue-paying estates, one of which was tauzi No. 1070, and another of which was tauzi No. 1103.

(2.) In 1920, an application was made to the Collector of Darbhanga under the Estates Partition Act, and, ultimately, the land was partitioned and allotted, not to the plaintiffs first-party, but to the defendants first-party, who were the proprietors of tauzi No. 1103. In the partition, the land was treated as bakasht land, and, after being put in possession of the new estate formed for them, the defendants first-party settled it with the defendants second-party. A struggle for possession ensued between the plaintiffs second-party on the one hand and the defendants second-party on the other. A proceeding under Section 145, Criminal P.C. was instituted, and, eventually, the plaintiffs second-party relinquished possession and undertook to institute a suit in the civil Courts. The suit, out of which this second appeal arises, was, in due course, instituted, and, in it, the plaintiffs second-party claimed possession of the land, while the plaintiffs first- party asked for a declaration that they were tenants liable to pay rent to the defendants first-party, the plaintiffs second-party being sub-lessees under themselves.

(3.) The land in suit comprises an area of between 23 and 24 bighas, and was originally part of a larger area of some 57 bighas. 12 bighas out of this 57 bighas was settled in 1870 by the Manjhaul factory, which was then in possession of the estate, in which the land was situated, as a thicadar, with one Prayag Rai. The land appears, then, to have been parti land, and the settlement was for a period of seven years. Prayag Rai seems to have continued to hold over on the expiry of his lease, and, in or about 1885, he gave this land to Sheocharan Singh and Chhotuprasad Singh, the ancestors of the plaintiffs first-party, in exchange for some other land. In 1895, Jakar Singh, the son of Prayag Singh, re-conveyed to Sheocharan Singh and Chhotuprasad Singh a portion of the land, which had previously belonged to them and which Jakar Singh had taken from them in exchange. Certain other land, belonging to Jakar Singh was also conveyed to Sheocharan Singh and Chhotuprasad Singh by this sale deed, the consideration money for which was Rs. 95-10-0. Sometime between 1885 and 1895, Sheocharan Singh and Chhotuprasad Singh purchased from another person an area of 12 bighas lO kathas.