NRIPENDRA NATH MUKERJI Vs. DHARENDRA NARAYAN NANDI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is the defendant's appeal from the judgment, and decree of my learned brother Mr. Justice Majumdar affirming a decision of the lower appellate Court.

(2.) The plaintiff is one of several co-owners of four revenue-paying estates with separate touzi numbers. It appears that the whole of the area of these four touzis has been settled in talukdari right with the defendants for a consolidated jama of Rs. 179-2-8 gandas. In my judgment, the circumstance that the tenure is coextensive with the whole area of the four touzis is of no importance for the present purpose, but it is a fact, as I understand, that the whole of the land comprised in the four touzis is comprised in this tenure at the consolidated rent of Rs. 179-2-8 gandas.

(3.) The facts are these: that the plaintiff is registered in the colleetorate as having in three of the touzis a share of 4 annas 8 gandas and in one of the touzis aa having a share of 19-1/4 gandas not quite one anna. The suit was brought on the footing that the plaintiff had an equal share in all the four, that being put as 4 annas 12 gandas. In point of fact the share of the plaintiff is now admitted to have been wrongly stated in the plaint and the facts are as I have given. Upon that footing the plaintiff bringing his suit for rent is met with the provisions of Section 78, Land Registration Act (VII B.C. of 1876.) It is said that it is wrong to give judgment for the amount claimed by the plaintiff because under that section a tenant is entitled to say that ho will pay no greater share of the rent to a co-sharer landlord than the landlord is registered in the collectorate as having.