COLLECTOR OF SALEM Vs. PUR BATCHA SAHIB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question is as to the costs of the plaintiff which have been, by the Court below, ordered to be paid to him by the 1 defendant, the Collector of the District. Under Madras Act I of 1876, the Collector is authorised to order separate registration and sub-division when there has been an alienation of a. portion of a peramanently settled estate, if the parties to the alienation concur in applying for an order and if objections, if any, taken by other parties interested and disallowed by him.

(2.) In the present case, the plaintiff claims under an alienation made by the deceased father of the 2nd defendant, and the 2nd defendant who is the representative of the alienor concurred in the application to the Collector for separate registration and subdivision.

(3.) The 3 defendant who holds a share in the mitta in which the plaintiff is a shareholder under his alienation, raised an objection to the separate registration and sub-division of the plaintiff's portion on the ground that the parties had agreed under a partition between the alienor and the other co-sharers to apportion the peishcush payable by each shareholder, and that the amount of peishcush to be fixed by the Collector as payable by the plaintiff ought not to differ from the amount fixed by the agreement.