KOSARAJU PEDA SUBBAYYA Vs. MORAVANENI VEERAYYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the defendants, against the decree of the Subordinate Judge who awarded a sum of Rs. 2,930 with further interest thereon, as damages caused to the plaintiffs by the joint acts of the defendants in unlawfully grazing their cattle on certain lands obtained by the plaintiff's permanent jiroyati patta from the Zamindar of South Vallur.

(2.) The plaintiffs and the defendants belong to neighbouring villages and it would appear that some of the defendants have been trying to get the lands in question from the Zamindar, but ultimately the plaintiffs succeeded in getting jiroyati patta for them on 31 October 1923. The lands consist partly of cultivated land, but mainly of a large extent of forest land. The defendants on behalf of themselves and other ryots of their village asserted that they had a right to graze their cattle and sheep on the suit lands and to take brushwood and fuel from the forest and also to take wood for making agricultural implements. As the defendants persisted in asserting their rights and in grazing their cattle on the suit ands in spite of the plaintiffs obtaining the suit lands on patta, the plaintiffs had to file O.S. No. 83 of 1923 against a large number of defendants as representing the ryots of the villages of Koppakka and Peddakadimi, to obtain an injunction restraining them from doing any of the above acts. Pending that suit the plaintiffs applied for a temporary injunction; but the Court granted a temporary injunction only in respect of cutting of trees, but not in respect of grazing. It however directed that the defendants should file a statement showing the heads of the cattle which they possessed and they grazed in the plaint lands in a week. It is obvious that this condition was imposed with a view to facilitate the calculation of liability or damages in respect of the J grazing, if in the end the plaintiffs, should succeed in the suit. Unfortunately, the ryots did not file any such statement in that suit. The plaintiffs ultimately succeeded in that suit and have now filed this suit claiming damages jointly against all the defendants for the loss caused to them by their grazing their cattle on the suit lands during the faslis 1334, 1335 and 1336.

(3.) The Subordinate Judge has held that the defendants are jointly liable to the plaintiffs, but awarded a much smaller amount than that claimed in the plaint by way of damages. The defendants have appealed against the decree in so far as it awarded any amount by way of damages jointly against all the defendants, and the plaintiffs have filed a memorandum of objections claiming that a larger sum should have been allowed.