ABDUL MAJID Vs. NAGESHAR DAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by Defendant No. 5 arising out of a suit for recovery of possession of certain zamindari property by ejectment of the defendant. On the 13 April 1909, a registered lease for 11 years was executed by the then proprietor Sheik Mahmudullah in favour of one Bhawani Charan. This lease was of a five-anna zamindari share in an undivided mahal. The contesting defendant is a sub-lessee from Bhawani Charan's representatives and the term of the lease has now admittedly expired. The plaintiffs, on the other hand, have acquired a one anna and odd pie share in the proprietary interest of the lessors and two anna seven pie and odd-share as lessees from the proprietors. The contesting defendant, on the other hand, is in possession of the entire five annas. The plaintiffs claim that the term of the lease having expired, the defendants were not entitled to hold on and they were liable to ejectment through the civil Court.

(2.) The main contention put forward on behalf of the defendants was that the civil Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit inasmuch as the original lessee and the sub-lessee are in the position of tenants within the meaning of the Agra Tenancy Act and cannot be ejected otherwise than in accordance with that Act. The learned Subordinate Judge has overruled this plea and has held that there is in fact no relation of landlord and tenant existing between the parties. The suit for ejectment has accordingly been decreed.

(3.) It is conceded before us that on the merits the defendant cannot contest the claim of the plaintiffs. Unless it be held that he cannot be ejected otherwise than in accordance with the Agra Tenancy Act and by the Revenue Court, he has no substantive defence to put forward against the plaintiffs. The learned vakil for the appellant contends before us that although the property leased cannot be called a holding within the meaning of the Act, nevertheless the position of Bhawani Charan and now that of the defendant-appellant is that of a tenant within the meaning of Section 4 of that Act and that the ejectment of such a tenant cannot be effected except in accordance with the provisions of the Tenancy Act. He relied strongly on the provisions of Secs.56 and 167 of the Agra Tenancy Act.