N SUBBA REDDI Vs. PMARGA SASTRIAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal relating to the sale of a holding under the Madras Estates Land Act for an arrear of rent in fasli 1325 (1915) 13 years ago. The plaintiff was the sub-lessee of an estate called Janakrajukuppam from 1913 to 1918 from the permanent lessee. The properties in question belonged to defendant 1's father and on 9 July 1919 the plaintiff attached and brought the lands in respect of rent due for fasli 1325 as stated and purchased them himself.

(2.) The plaintiff alleges that the defendants trespassed and took possession in 1922 and therefore asks for a declaration of his right in respect of the properties and for a direction for delivery of possession. The written statement sets out that the rent auction has become void because the plaintiff "has taken out rent sale proceedings" against the defendant's father who died in 1917. The written statement then goes on to set out in detail the reasons why the rent auction was invalid "in every way" and also fraudulent, the main contention being that there was no proclamation, it was a hushed up sale and that no auction took place in the village at all. There are various other contentions but none of them have been relied on in appeal before me. The District Munsif held that there had been an abrogation of the provisions of the Estates Land Act as to proclamation and sale of holding in this case and dismissed the plaintiff's suit. The Subordinate Judge reversed that decree and decreed the plaintiff's suit. Hence this second appeal.

(3.) Three points are taken, the first that after 1918 the plaintiff ceased to be a landholder under the Estates Land Act and Sundaram Ayyar V/s. Kulathu Ayyar [1916] 39 Mad. 1018, was referred to. The point, however, was not persisted in in view of the fact that these proceedings had commenced before the termination of the sub-lease to the plaintiff's father.