THANAPPA CHETTY Vs. ESUF KHAN SAHIB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a suit for the declaration of the plaintiffs right to the whole minor produce in the villages of Pudur Jaghir, and for injunction and damages. The Jaghir of Pudur otherwise known as Ariya Goundan Jaghir is one of the five estates situated in the Kalroyan hills. The hills are partly in the Salem District and partly in the South Arcot District. This suit Jaghir also is in the South Arcot District and partly in the Salem District. The 1 defendant is the present Jaghir under or the proprietor of the estate. The plaintiff was the lessee for six years from the 1 defendant of the minor produce of the Jaghir under a registered lease deed, Ex. A, dated 24 August 1908, which took effect from 10 July 1909 to 9 July 1915; The lease has since been extended under another deed dated 5 December 1918, Ex. B, for 25 years, i. e., from 9 July 1915 to 10 July 1940. Defendants 6 to 63 are the cultivators of the entire lands in the Jaghir. They claim a right to the minor produce and Defendants 6 to 63 have entered into an agreement to sell it exclusively to the 2nd defendant The plaintiff alleges that the action of the defendants amounted to a denial of the plaintiffs right and caused damages to him and sues for the declaration and the other reliels already mentioned. The 1 defendant Polighar, supports the plaintiff.

(2.) The lands in the Jaghir are classified as Olavakkadu, i. e., (1) land that is actually cultivated permanently with ploughs, (2) ponalkadu, i. e., lands under shifting cultivation; (3) natham i. e., house sites and backyard, (4) alankadu, i.e., jungle. The suit originally is for a declaration of the plaintiffs right to the minor produce in all the lands of the Jaghir and the defendants have similarly asserted their right to the minor produce in all the lands including even alankadu. But in the course of the trial before the District Munsif the defendants have given up their right to the lands comprised in the description alankadu.

(3.) Before us the plaintiff has given up the right claimed in respect of natham, so that the dispute before us relates only to olavakkadu and ponalkadu lands. Both the District Munsif and the District Judge granted the declaration and injunction prayed for by the plaintiff. As to damages while the District Munsif give a decree the District Judge reversed it in appeal; In this second appeal the appellants are either Defendants 3 to 68 or their legal representatives.