NARHAR NARAYAN DESHPANDE Vs. GANPATI HARI SHINDE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question in this appeal is, whether the plaintiff-appellant is entitled to eject the defendants-respondents. Both the lower Courts held against the plaintiff, who appeals.

(2.) The lands were part of the Kulkarni vatan lands of the A.C.J. appellant's family. The appellant's father, who was a Kulkarni Vatandar, passed in 1886 a miraspatra or permanent lease in favour of the father of the defendant-respondent No. 1, The lessor died in 1895 and was succeeded by the appellant. From 1895 to 1919 the appellant who was admittedly aware of the permanent lease and its entry in the Record of Rights took no steps to set it aside but on the contrary took the rent recited in the permanent lease from the respondents from year to year until he brought the present suit in 1923. The trial Court held that the appellant was estopped from bringing the present suit and that it was barred by limitation, not having been brought within twelve years of his father's death and his own succession as Yatandar in 1895.

(3.) The appeal turns on two questions, one of fact, and the other of law. The question of fact is, whether, after the father's death in 1895, the appellant ratified and continued the lease at least for his own life-time. The question of law is, whether the present suit is barred by limitation.