LALCHAND NATHURAM Vs. NANDU S/O. PALTU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order disposes of foot miscellaneous (second) appeals, namely, 27, 28, 29 and 80 of 1946 as all are on the same point.

(2.) THE facts of this case may be briefly stated as under. The appellant, Seth Lalchand obtained decrees for arrears of rent against Nandu (non-applicant: 1) in this appeal as well as against various other tenants who are' impleaded in other sister appeals. He was the lambardar of the villages Madia and Kuraiya. He had executed a mortgage of his interest in these villages in favour of Musammat Kausalya Bai (respondent 2), who is ateo respondent 2 in all the other appeals. Mt. Kausalya Bai obtained a mortgage decree, and in execution of that decree she put to auction the appellant's share and herself bought it. Thus she obtained proprietary interest in these villages on 11.12-1932.

(3.) THE objections in all these cases were that the tenants who figured as respondent 1 in all these four appeals had been either ejected or had surrendered their holdings to the lambardar Mt. Kausalya Bai, that Mt. Kausalya Bai was in possession of the agricultural lands which formed the holdings of the judgment-debtors tenants for over three years, that the tenants' right to the holdings, if any, had been extinguished and that the appellant could not bring to sale the holdings, which were not in existence when the applications for execution were made.