JAGANNATH MONDAL Vs. BHAJAHARI NATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the suit out of which this appeal has arisen the plaintiffs sued to eject the defendant on the following allegations. Their case was that the defendant was their under-raiyat holding some 11 bighas of land tinder thorn at a rental of Rs. 13 per year. Notices had been duly served under Section 49 of the Bengal Tenancy Act but the defendant had not quitted the land and hence the suit. The defendant's case was that he was a raiyat with the right of occupancy and he farther contended that his nephews being his co-sharers were necessary parties to the suit.

(2.) The Court of first instance held that the case must fail owing to defect of parties, being of the opinion that the nephews of the defendant were necessary parties and he further held that the defendant being an occupancy raiyat was not liable to be evicted. In appeal these findings were reversed. The lower Appellate Court held that the respondent was an under-raiyat, and he further held that the nephews of the respondent were not necessary parties. Hence he decreed the appeal and decreed the whole suit with costs.

(3.) The defendant has appealed to this Court. His first point is that certain recitals in the kobala by which the predecessor of the appellant purchased the holding are not evidence against him. It would appear that the learned Judge used this kobala for the purpose of determining the status of the appellant. He relied on the statement in the kobala that what the appellant's predecessor purchased was the land and the crops and from this statement that the crops were also purchased drew the inference which was a perfectly legitimate one that the appellant's predecessor's vendor was a cultivating raiyat. The statement in the kobala merely shows what was purchased by the appellant's predecessor and, therefore, can be used as evidence against the appellant and the learned Judge was entitled to draw the inference he did.