JOGENDRA NARAIN SINGH Vs. RADHA PRASAD SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the plaintiffs against the judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge of Deoghar dated 10 September 1934, by which he dismissed the plaintiffs suit which they had instituted for a declaration that Kunjora was a Ghatwali tenure entitled to be held generation after generation an perpetuity subject to the payment of fixed and established rent and subject also to the performance of certain duties and (for a further declaration that the dismissal of plaintiff 1 from the office of the Ghatwal was ultra vires and in the alternative for a declaration that the plaintiff second party as his son was entitled to and eligible for the appointment for the office of Ghatwal in his place and that the appointment of the defendant first party was illegal and without jurisdiction. The plaintiffs also claimed that either plaintiff 1 or plaintiff 2 may be placed in possession of the Ghatwali of Kunjora by evicting the defendant first party; there was also a claim for mesne profits. The Secretary of State for India in Council was impleaded as a second party but no relief was sought against him beyond the fact that the plaintiffs wanted the decision in the presence of the Secretary of State. The learned Subordinate Judge has dismissed the suit of the plaintiffs. Hence the appeal before us.

(2.) The facts necessary for the determination of the matters which are in controversy in this case are no longer in dispute (the only dispute is as to the legal rights of the parties and as to the inference to be drawn from certain documents) and may be shortly stated. The Kunjora Ghatwali in dispute (which will be hereinafter referred to as "the Ghatwali") bears touzi No. 1/36 Tappa Sarath Deoghar and is admittedly a Ghatwali tenure governed by Birbhum Ghatwali Regulation, 29 of 1814.

(3.) It is also admitted that this Ghatwali is descendible from generation to generation but nevertheless subject to payment of fixed and established rent to the zamindar of Birbhum through the Deputy Commissioner of the Santal Parganas and also subject to the performance of certain duties for the maintenance of the public peace and for supporting the police. It is also common ground that the plaintiff first party succeeded1 to this Ghatwali in the year 1904 on executing a muchilka in the customary and ancient form which is to be (found at page 15 of the paper book and beears date 7 September 1904. Since then the has been in possession of the Ghatwali which is 14 square miles in area, and from which he has been dispossessed by reason of an order of dismissal by the Commissioner of the Santal Parganas dated 15 March 1930, with effect from 1st April following.