BARAIK AKHAJ SINGH Vs. SHRI NATH TEWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff in this litigation holds a jagir in the estate of the Maharaja of Chota Nagpur. In 1901 he made a mokarrari settlement of two villages Kuda and Dufu With Lachman Sahu reserving an annual rent of Rs. 14 and taking a premium of Rs. 4458. Lachman Sahu made a darmokarrari grant of Dufu to certain defendants in this case and a darmokarrari grant of the greater part of Kuda village to other defendants; while he sold his interest in the remaining area of Kuda to a third set of defendants. All of Lachman Sahu's sons died during his life and after the death of Lachman Sahu, the plaintiff instituted this suit for recovery of possession of the villages on the ground that the grant had lapsed on failure of male heirs of Lachman Sahu. The plaintiff claimed that by custom such grants were resumable on the failure of male heirs, but the Subordinate Judge found that this custom had not been proved. The Subordinate Judge found that the mokarrari lease was a perpetual and absolute grant and dismissed the suit. His decision was confirmed on appeal by the Judicial Commissioner of Chota Nagpur.

(2.) The lease purported to be a lease in perpetuity to Lachman Sahu and his heirs. The words used in the lease were "putra poutradik mai warisan kayem mokamian." "Kayem mokamian" means "deputies or representatives" and according to Johnson and Richardson's Persian Dictionary means also agents or assignees. The term putra poutradik used in grants and jagirs in Chota Nagpur means ordinarily heirs in the direct male line and this may be assumed to be its ordinary meaning in Chota Nagpur. Mr. B.C. De cites as authority for this proposition the decision of the Judicial Committee in Ram Narayan Singh V/s. Ram Saran Lal A.I.R (1918) . P.C. 203 and although it is to be remarked that in these cases where a particular meaning has been applied to words used in grants of jagirs, the decision has been on the evidence in the case, it may be taken, that in Chota Nagpur putra poutradik standing alone means heirs of the grantee's body in the direct male line.

(3.) The words istimrari mokarrari in the Ramgarh estate have "been held to confer only a life interest when they are accompanied by no other words of inheritance; but here we have to consider what is to be taken to be the effect of the expression "putra poutradik mai warisan kayem mokamian." This might be translated into English as male heirs of his body, general heirs and assigns; and it appears to me that it would be unreasonable to hold that the addition o these words does not in any way modify the effect of the words putra poutradik . In Brojokeshore Ram V/s. Jagat Mohan Nath A.I.R (1920). Pat. 785 it was held that in the grant of a jagir by the Maharaja of Chota Nagpur these words added nothing to the effect of the words putra poutradik , but that decision was based on the existence of a custom which had been pleaded by the plaintiff and admitted by the defendant by which jagirs were resumable on failure of heirs male in the male line of the grantee.