GANGADAYAL MISIR Vs. SRIMATI CHHAKINA BHANU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal on behalf of the plaintiff from a decision of the Additional Subordinate Judge of Noakhali, dated the 8 August 1924, which modified a decision of the Munsiff, 2nd Court, Lakhimpur, dated the 7 July 1922.

(2.) The plaintiff's case is that there was a raiyati holding of which three persons were the owners, that is, Ganga Dayal, the plaintiff, himself, Baldeo and one Ram Prosad who is cousin of the plaintiff. Principal defendants were subtenants under all the three persons whom I have named. In execution of a decree for rent this sub-tenancy which is also described as osat- raiyati was sold and was purchased by Baldeo and Subhadrat the widow of Ram Prosad, on the 9 January 1919. They took delivery of symbolical possession on the 27 August 1919. On the 21 November 1919 Subhadra, the widow of Ram Prosad, executed a deed of relinquishment by which she gave up her interest in all the properties of her husband in favour of the plaintiff who was alleged to be Ram Prosad's next and sole reversionary heir. The deed only made certain provisions for maintenance in favour of the widow of Ram Prosad. The widow of Ram Prosad, Subhadra, is also a party to the suit. She is one of the defendants.

(3.) The Court of first instance granted a decree to the plaintiff declaring his title to the extent of one-third share in the holding but refused to grant the plaintiff joint possession by the demolition of the huts which were on the land. An appeal was carried to the subordinate judge by the plaintiff and in appeal the subordinate judge varied the decree of the munsiff by declaring plaintiff's title to two-thirds share in the land in suit. The subordinate judge also did not grant the prayer for khas possession and held that the defendants could not be turned out of the land at the instance of the plaintiff alone.