GHASIA Vs. THAKUR RAMSINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I think this case has not been tried on proper lines. The real question to be decided has not been properly grasped; nor were proper issues framed; the trial has consequently been wholly vitiated. There is much which though necessary for the proper adjudication of the case has been left unascertained and undecided. This was preeminently a case for the personal examination of the parties. The principal question in the case was of the acquiescence on the part of the landlord in the right of the defendant to occupy the premises purchased by him on 31-5-1921.

(2.) BOTH the Judges have looked askance at the defence and have rejected the defendant's plea of acquiescence as an afterthought. The site in dispute was formerly in the occupation of one Babulal Brahman as a building site and his house stood on it. He sold it to the defendant for Rs. 300 by a registered deed dated 31-5-21. The plaintiffs who together with Defendant No. 2 constitute the whole proprietary body instituted the present suit on 18-10-1922 for ejectment of the defendant on the ground that Babulal had no right to sell the site, and consequently the defendant acquired no right to occupy it against their will.

(3.) ON 7-12-22 certain facts were ascertained by Court from the parties. The defendant then stated that he commenced to build upon the site soon after his purchase and completed it about two months ago, at a cost of about Rs. 300. Plaintiffs replied that they never consented to the defendant's possession or purchase as alleged. They denied that the defendant rebuilt the house on the site in suit and incurred the alleged expenditure; they alleged that the defendant was asked to vacate the site soon after the purchase but the latter refused to vacate.