BAJRANGI RAUT Vs. LALA JANKI PARSHAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the defendants in an action with regard to 3 bighas 15 kathas 19 dhurs of land. The defendants were in possession. The plaintiff claimed possession on the footing of a custom to the effect that the river Lakhandei was taken to be under all circumstances the boundary between the plaintiff's village and the defendants village. The plaintiff's village is Semra and the defendants Bhabaprasad. Now, in order to come to a conclusion, it is essential to note the manner in which the plaintiff put his case before the Court.

(2.) In the plaint he contended in the first instance that the land in dispute accreted to his village; then, later on in his plaint by para. 5, he alleged the custom to which I have already referred. The learned Judge in the Courts below, in my opinion, quite clearly decided the case on the footing of the custom. Issues were settled and the first issue was to this effect: Whether there is any custom of usage by which the middle of the river Lakhandei has been fixed to be the boundary between the two adjoining villages Semra and Bhabaprasad.

(3.) Then deciding the second issue which was: Whether the river Lakhandei had suddenly changed its course in the year 1902 as alleged by defendant or had gradually shifted and the lands form accretion to plaintiff's village,