LAWS(PVC)-1927-3-207

TOTA RAM Vs. MAKHAN LAL

Decided On March 23, 1927
TOTA RAM Appellant
V/S
MAKHAN LAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The parties to this appeal are brothers. The plaintiff-respondent claimed joint possession of two plots of land on the allegation that the parties were the joint tenants of these plots, and that the defendant had, contrary to his rights, taken exclusive possession of the same. The defence to the suit was that there had been a partition between the parties and that the plots in dispute had been allotted solely to the defendant by that partition. Both the Courts below have found that the partition set up by the defendant has not been proved. This finding of the lower appellate Court is a finding of fact based on evidence and must be accepted in second appeal.

(2.) But an ingenious argument based on an observation, to be presently noted, contained in the judgment of the lower appellate Court is advanced by Mr. Panna Lal on behalf of the appellant. The lower appellate Court has observed that it is possible that for the proper enjoyment of the joint holding the parties might be cultivating separate plots, but any such mutual arrangement cannot confer any exclusive title on either party.

(3.) It is argued that in view of the decisions in Jagannath Pershad V/s. Badri Prashad [1912] 34 All. 113, Jamna V/s. Jhalli [1920] 18 A.L.J. 129 and Midnapur Zemindary Co., Ltd, V/s. Naresh Narayan Roy A.I.R. 1924 P.C. 144, the plaintiff was not so long as the arrangement, just referred to, continued, entitled to a decree for joint possession of the plots in dispute.