REAJUDDIN BEPARI Vs. CHAND BAKSHA HAJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case I think the appeal should be allowed.

(2.) It appears that the plaintiff purchased the raiyati interest in the land from Bakshi Prodhania and Falu, Sikdar. The under-raiyat interest became vested by a series of transactions in a man called Abdul Ali, and through Abdul Ali the, under-raiyati interest became vested in defendant No. 1 in respect of plot No. 3, which is the only plot regarding which this appeal is made.

(3.) Now apparently Abdul Ali; purported to sell the raiyati interest, but it has been found by the Court below as a fact, which we must accept, that he had only the under-raiyati interest at the time of the sale. Therefore, as between him and the defendant No. 1, he was able to pass nothing more than the under-raiyati interest. The defendant No. 1 went into possession in the year 1893 in consequence of this purchase from Abdul Ali. Therefore, it must be taken for the purpose of this appeal that he entered upon the land in the capacity of an under-raiyat. The suit has been dismissed in respect of this plot, on the ground that the defendant No. 1 has thus been in possession of this plot from 1893 down to the institution of the suit, that is, more than twelve years. In my judgment in the circumstances of this case that is not a. good ground for the dismissal of the suit.