KOKA RAM Vs. SALIG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal by a plaintiff arises out of a suit brought by him as sub- tenant of a certain holding against the defendants-respondents as his own sub- tenants is respect of part of the holding. The suit is based upon a kabuliyat, dated 18 July 1823, which expresses the acceptance by the defendants of certain land, for one year on a rental of Rs. 139-2-0. The year in question was 1331 Fasli equivalent to July 1923 24 The claim concerns not only that year but the kharif portion of the following year 1332 Fasli. There are thus two causes of action. One is based on the contractual agreement created by the kabuliyat and one is based upon the liability of a tenant holding over to pay rent. Such joinder of causes of action is permitted by Order 2, Rule 3, Civil P.C., and that rule is not excluded by Section 192, U.P. Tenancy Act 2, 1901 from applying to suits under the Tenancy Act.

(2.) The suit was resisted in the trial Court on the ground that the defendants had paid a sum of Rs 240 to the Co-operative Bank in order to save their crops from attachment by the bank in relation to a debt owed by the occupancy tenants of the holding, that is to say, the lessors of the plaintiff, and consequently it was pleaded that the defendants were not bound to pay their rent as they could set off this sum against it, the plaintiff being deemed to have contracted for the defendant's peaceful enjoyment of the land leased. This plea was accepted by the trial Court.

(3.) In appeal the District Judge rightly held that Section 193(g) was a bar to the defendants claim to set off in this suit. He held, however, that the lease under which the defendants held the land securing a rent of over Rs. 100 required registration and not being registered could not be proved. He therefore dismissed the suit.