RAMANI MOHAN ROY Vs. JAGUBANDHU KARMAKAR AND, ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff was away from home for a number of years and during his absence his son defendant No. 5 managed his properties.

(2.) The plaintiff had a nimhowla within a certain osat taluk which was sold for arrears of rent. The purchaser served notices under Section 167 of the Bengal Tenancy Act upon under- tenants and then sold the osat taluk to defendant No. 1. Defendant No. 1 brought a suit for khas possession against defendant No. 5 as the son and heir of the plaintiff described as dead and got a decree in a contested suit.

(3.) The plaintiff on return from pilgrimage brought the suit giving rise to this appeal for a declaration that he was not bound by the decree against defendant No. 5 and for recovery of possession. Both the Courts below decreed the suit of the plaintiff and defendant No. 1 appeals. It has so happened that pending the appeal the plaintiff died leaving defendant No. 5 as his sole heir and the contest is now between defendant No. 1 as the appellant and defendant No. 5 as the respondent.