BHARATH SINGH Vs. DEBI DAYAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts of the case out of which this appeal has arisen are as follows: The plaintiff and his uncle, Dwarka Singh, are members of a joint Hindu family. On the 6 of June 1903 the defendants first party executed what purported to be a perpetual lease of their sir lands in certain villages in favour of the plaintiff Bharath Singh, who is a minor. On the 10 of June 1903 those defendants executed a sale-deed of their zamindari in those two villages for the consideration of Rs. 2,294-6 in favour of Dwarka Singh, the uncle. Both documents wore registered on the same day. A sum of Rs. 1,105 is entered in the lease as nazrana, which was paid by the lessee to the lessor after the registration. Subsequently to this the defendants, second party, who are members of the same family as the defendants first party, brought a suit to set aside the lease and the lease was as a result of that litigation set aside. On this the lessee has now brought the present suit to recover the sum of Rs. 1,105 paid as nazrana in accordance with the terms of the lease.

(2.) The Court of first instance decreed the suit for the sum of Rs. 800 holding that that was the true amount of nazrana paid.

(3.) On appeal the lower appellate Court has found that as a matter of fact the two transactions, the sale and the lease, constitute one simultaneous transaction and that the nazrana was really the sale price of the appellant's exproprietary rights. In other words, it found that the sole object of the lease was to defeat the provisions of the Tenancy Act regarding exproprietary rights, that the consideration of the nazrana was unlawful and, therefore, the plaintiff was not entitled to recover the sum claimed.