IMDAD HUSAIN Vs. AZIZ-UN-NISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE object of the suit, in which the apellant is plaintiff, is to recover a village called Cheton, which the defendants hold in possession. The history of the plaintiff's dealings withthe property is long and complicated, but the facts material to the decision of the present question may be concisely stated.

(2.) IN the year 1854, when the Mahomedan dynasty was still in power, one Hafiz ali was owner of teh ilaka of Jaipur, which comprised the village of Cheton. He made an usufructuary mortgage of the ilaka to Tafazzul Hussain to secure Rs. 2000. Tafazzul was thus in possession of the ilaka, and so remained during the annexation, and the confiscation, and the subsequent with him, and a sanad granted to him as talukdar of Samanpur, in which village Cheton was then include.

(3.) UNDER that decree the plaintiff appears to have possessed himself of the ilaka, excepting the village of Cheton, which the defendants claim to retain by a title valid against both Tafazzul's heir and the plaintiff.