RAJAH OF VIZIANAGARAM Vs. PERUMETCHA APPALARAJU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff, the Rajah of Vizianagaram, is the appellant. He claimed rent from the defendant, for the suit land in respect of faslis 1332 to 1334 at the rate of Rs. 364-0-6 per fasli. The defendant contended that he was liable to pay only at the rate of Rs. 239-15-5 and that the settlement rent at the higher figure is not binding on him. The plaintiff replied that the defendant was precluded from raising these pleas by virtue of the decision in S.S. No. 31. of 20 which he contended would operate as res judicata between the parties. The two points for determination are : (1) whether the prior decision in S.S. 31 of 20 in favour of the higher rate claimed by the plaintiff is res judicata and (2) whether the settlement rent at the higher figure is binding on the defendant. On both these points both the lower Courts found in favour of the defendant.

(2.) I may state at once that the finding on the second point that the settlement rent at the higher figure is not binding on the tenant is a finding of fact based upon the evidence in the case. Both the lower Courts have considered the evidence which is to the effect that the settlement rent was never collected from the tenant and that he never executed any kadapa for the same. The District Judge says: There is ample evidence that the landholder treated in his accounts the higher rate as only on paper, and that Exs. 3, and 4, are clear evidence that in the faslis mentioned therein the tenant did not pay the settlement rent.

(3.) The finding that the settlement rent at the higher figure now claimed is not binding on the defendant cannot be questioned in second appeal.