SHIVA PRASAD SINGH Vs. BHAGWANDAS AGARWALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a plaintiff's second appeal against a decree of the lower Appellate Court substantially dismissing the plaintiff's claim. The lower Appellate Court did give the plaintiff possession of certain items of property, and against that portion of the decree the respondents have filed a cross-objection.

(2.) The material facts of the case can be shortly seated as follows: Jodharam and his co-sharers had a raiyati holding having occupancy rights in mouza Dhanbad. The total area of the holding was approximately 14.9 acres. In the year 1920 Jodharam sold approximately 5 acres of this holding to defendants 1 to 3 and this sale deed is dated 7 October 1920. Thereafter the plaintiff received the rent of whole holding, though it would appear that the defendants 1 to 3 contributed the rent in respect of their portion, namely 5 acres. The plaintiff however accepted the rent in the name of Jodharam and thereby acknowledged Jodharam as his tenant of the whole holding.

(3.) In the year 1930 Jodharam executed a release in favour of the plaintiff; but both the Courts below have held as a fact that this transaction was not a genuine one and had no effect whatsoever. In fact, after the year 1930 the plaintiff gave receipts for the rent of the whole holding in the name of Jodharam. In short, uptil the institution of this suit, the plaintiff had insisted that Jodharam was still tenant of the whole holding. In the, present suit the plaintiff contended that the transfer of 7 October 1920 to defendants 1 to 3 had no legal effect whatsoever. It is said that this land is subject to the provisions of the Chota Nagpur Tenancy Act and that the transfer could have no effect by reason of Section 46 of that Act. It is conceded that the transfer could not give to defendants 1 to 3 a tenancy in this property.