RAJA RAM Vs. CHHEDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Village Salahpur, pargana Daranagar, district Bijnor, belonged to four brothers, Ram Chander Mal, Ishwari Prasad, Chhote Lal and Jwala Prasad. On 15th October 1925, the village was sold by them to one Lala Makkhan Lal. At the time when the sale deed was executed, the settlement proceedings were in progress and it was anticipated that there would be some change in the amount of the land revenue payable to the Government which would affect the profits realisable by the zamindar. Along with the sale deed an agreement was executed on the same date, 15 October 1925, between the vendors and the vendee, and this agreement provided that if as a result of the settlement the profits remained at Rs. 1,500, Rs. 36,000 the price for which the village was being sold, would hold good, but if the profits were reduced the vendors would have to refund the decrease in the profits at the rate of 5 annas per cent. per mensem out of the sale consideration of Rs. 35,000, and if the profits were increased, the vendee will have to pay the extra amount over and above the Rs. 35,000 calculated at the same rate of 5 annas per cent. per mensem. The settlement proceedings lasted for several years and terminated in 1344 Fasli. The lower Court has held that this was some time towards the e May, 1937. The revised land revenue was payable from 1345 Fasli, that is, 1 July 1937. As a result of the revision in the land revenue, the profits of the village increased and the vendors became, therefore, liable to claim an extra amount over and above the sum of Rs. 35,000 that they had already received.

(2.) We are not concerned with Ram Chander Mal, Chhote Lal and Jwala Prasad and their descendants. This suit was brought by the son and grand-son of Ishwari Prasad, Ishwari Prasad being dead, for their One-fourth share of the excess amount of the sale consideration. The amount claimed by them was Rs. 6,000 out of which Rs. 3640 was claimed as the principal and the rest, Rs. 2,360 as interest. The plaintiffs had alleged that as a result of the revision in the land revenue the profits had exceeded the sum of Rs. 1,500 and Rs. 14,560 was the excess amount of the sale consideration payable to the vendors out of which the plaintiffs were entitled to a one-fourth share.

(3.) Chheda Lal defendant alone contested the suit and he raised several pleas. He pleaded that the suit was time barred. He also urged that as Raja Ram had applied under the En-cumbered Estates Act and had not proved his claim in the Encumbered Estates Act proceedings, he had no right to claim the amount from the defendants. It was further alleged that the amount claimed by the plaintiffs was excessive and the plaintiffs were entitled to a much lesser amount.