LAWS(PVC)-1926-3-177

SATISH CHANDRA BANDOPADHYA Vs. HASEM ALI KAZI

Decided On March 30, 1926
SATISH CHANDRA BANDOPADHYA Appellant
V/S
HASEM ALI KAZI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the suit oat of which this appeal has arisen fch.3 plaintiffs who are the respondents in the present appeal sought to recover possession after declaration of title of certain plots of land in karsha interest. Their case was that they with others held a karsha interest in the land under Defendants Nos. 1 and 2. The Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 brought a rent suit and obtained a decree ex parte in a suit for rent No. 961 of 1914, and in execution of the decree pureha ed the property. The plaintiffs were made parties to the suit but they were minors and ware not properly represented. On November 14, 1917, the plaintiffs were fined for cutting away the paddy grown on the land on the ground that it had been grown by the Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 and after this Defendants No. 1 and 2 dispossessed plaintiffs and their co-sharers. Plaintiffs casa is that not being properly represented in the Suit No961 of 1914 their interest did not pass. Plence this suit.

(2.) The case of the Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 was that the minors were properly represented and the suit was barred by the special limitation of Art. 3, Schedule 3. Bengal Tenancy Act. The trial Court found that the minors were not properly represented in the Rant Suit No. 961 of 1914 and so their title did not pass by the sale. That Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 took symbolical possession on 25 December as purchasars at the auction sale and they actually dispossessed the plaintiffs some time before November 1916r that the special rule of limitation applied and so the suit was barred by limitation. The plaintiffs appealed to the District Court. That Court held that by taking delivery of possession on December 25 1915, the Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 dispossessed the plaintiffs, but that as they did this in their capacity of auction- purchaser's the special rule of limitation under Act. 3, Schedule 3 did not apply, and hence decreed the suit.

(3.) The question which has now been raised on appeal is what is the period of limitation which applies.