MUHAMMAD ABDULLAH KHAN Vs. KUNDAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a suit for arrears of rent claimed by the lambardar in respect of the years Rabi 1324 to Kharif 1327 F. The sole question for determination is whether the lambardar is entitled to recover.

(2.) The history of the village has been given in detail by the learned Assistant Collector who decreed the suit. The learned District Judge, in his appellate Judgment, writes that all the facts found by the learned Assistant Collector in his judgment were accepted before him. Indeed, the question is only one of inference to be drawn from admitted facts.

(3.) The admitted facts appear to be these. The mahal Abu Bakar Khan was divided by an imperfect partition into two pattis, viz., patti Khudaija Bibi and patti Abdullah Khan. The plaintiff-appellant was recorded as the lambardar in the divided mahal as he had already been the lambardar of the undivided mahal. In the patti Khudaija Bibi, Khuadaija Bibi herself had been making collections on behalf of herself and other co-sharers. Abdullah Khan had no share in patti Khudaija Bibi. Khudaija Bibi collected rents up to the year 1324 F. Kharif. Thereafter, she having sold a large portion of her share to the defendants, ceased to collect rent. Abdullah Khan inherited a portion of the patti Khudaija Bibi from a co-sharer. He came up on the scene and began to collect rent from tenants. So far as the present defendants are concerned they were sued by Abdullah Khan in the Settlement Court, for enhancement of rent. The rent was enhanced with effect from 1327 F. Abdullah Khan having brought the suit, it was contested on the ground that he had no right to recover. The defendants did not say that they would not pay rent to anybody and would appropriate it to themselves. But they said that they were paying rent to Khudaija Bibi and would pay rent to her alone.