LAWS(PVC)-1937-9-12

SIR KAMESHWAR SINGH BAHADUR Vs. BIBI FATMA

Decided On September 23, 1937
SIR KAMESHWAR SINGH BAHADUR Appellant
V/S
BIBI FATMA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question in this appeal is whether the so called under tenants were necessary as well as proper parties to the action. The learned Judge in the Court below has so held, and it is against that decision that this appeal is preferred. The question whether parties are both necessary and proper parties must of necessity depend upon the circumstances of the particular case. Mr. Murari Prasad in this case contends that they are not necessary parties as the judgment, if pronounced in his favour, does not bind parties who are not joined. That is, if I may say so, trite law, hut does not answer the contention in this case that the under, tenants who have been recorded as occupancy raiyats are necessary parties.

(2.) If the matter had been dependent upon contract, that is to say, had the rights as between the plaintiff and the defendants depended upon contract, or, to put it per. haps more precisely, had the matter concerned the general law of landlord and tenant in contradistinction to the law as provided by the Bengal Tenancy Act, something might have been said in support of the contention which Mr. Murari Prasad puts forward. It certainly would be the case there that any judgment pronounced as against the present defendants to the action would not have bound nor affected in any way the rights of the so-called under-tenants. But here we are concerned not merely with the question of the tenancy laws as provided by the Bihar Tenancy Act but more particularly with the question of status. In para. 7 the plaintiff alleges "that the defendant is an occupancy tenant and as such his status should be kaimi or mokarrarinahim, etc."

(3.) The plaintiff then proceeds to claim the relief that After determining and declaring the correct status of the defendants, let a decree be passed in favour of the plaintiff as against the defendant settling the proper annual rent payable by the defendant for the tenancy in suit in accordance with the instruction laid down by the Board of Revenue.