KANGALI DHUBI Vs. ICHHAMOYI DEBI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts out of which this appeal arises are shortly these.

(2.) The plaintiffs are rich men. The defendant has his residence on a small piece of. land near their residence. The plaintiffs coveted this land, bat they could not induce the defendant to give up the land in his possession. They at last entered into an agreement with the defendant and his landlords that they would give to the landlords another piece of land in similar right and take this land in taluki right, and that the defendant-appellant was to vacate the land on receipt of Rs. 60 as compensation for removing his huts and receive out of the land so given in exchange an equal piece of land with rights similar to those he previously had for the purpose of his residence. The landlords of the defendant, namely, Sarat and his brother were not originally made parties but subsequently, on the objection of the defendant, were added as parties.

(3.) The learned Muusif found that there was a tripartite agreement by which there was to be an exchange of land between the landlords of the defendant, Sarat and his brother on the one hand, and the plaintiff on the other, and the defendant-appellant was to vacate his huts on receipt of Its. 60 as compensation for the same and upon receiving from Sarat and his brother an equivalent quantity of land to the land given up by him and in similar right in exchange for this land. Although the learned Munsif found this tripartite agreement, he did not make any order against Sarat and his brother because there was no prayer in the plaint against them.