NATHU MANDER Vs. SURAJ NARAIN JHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Letters Patent Appeal by the plaintiffs against a decision of Ray J., and arises out of a suit for recovery of part of a holding.

(2.) Khosali Mandal and others were the recorded tenants of a holding of 28.4 acres. In 1906, the plaintiffs purchased 10 acres of this holding from Khosali, and later sold a part of it to Bhusi Mandal and another part to Gokul Ram Marwari, retaining the balance for themselves. The plaintiffs purchase was not recognised by the landlords, but their possession was noted in the remarks column of the record of rights.

(3.) In 1933, the landlords instituted a suit for rent against the recorded tenants and, in execution of the decree which they obtained in that suit, the entire holding was put up for sale and sold. At this sale the landlords were the purchasers. In the suit Khosali's nephews, who were minors and were co-tenants with him in the holding, were represented by a guardian ad litem appointed by the Court. Notices of the execution proceedings, however, were not served on this guardian. The minors were represented by their uncle Khosali. The sale was held on 10-8-1934, and confirmed on 10-9-1934. On 2-8-1935, Khosali, on his own behalf and on behalf of his minor nephews, made an application under Order 21, Rule 90 to have the sale set aside. This was dismissed. The landlords, who had purchased the holding in execution of the rent-decree, obtained delivery of possession on 24-1- 1935, and settled it with the defendants on 8-7-1985. The plaintiffs alleged that they were dispossessed by the defendants in 1942.