RAGHUNATH TEWARI Vs. BUDDHU RAM TEWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by defendant 1(Raghunath) arising out of a suit brought by his brother, Buddhu Ram (plaintiff-respondent), for joint possession of 460 acres of land in a village in Jaunpur district. Defendants 2 and 3 are the other two brothers of the plaintiff and defendant 1. The land in dispute was leased by its proprietors, Raja Amarpal Singh and Sheikh Kifayatullah by an instrument, dated 21 January 1925, ostensibly to Raghunath defendant 1 and one Sat Narain, a stranger to the family, on receipt of a premium of Rs. 2,000 at an annual rent of Rs. 24-8-0. The lease confers heritable and transferable rights on the lessees in express terms (naslan bad naslan wa batalan bad batalan qabili warasat we qabili intiqal), like those of a fixed rate tenant.

(2.) The plaintiff alleged that defendant 1 was not the lessee in his individual capacity but that it was the joint family consisting of all the four brothers that had taken the lease in the name of defendant 1 for the benefit of the whole family and that a disruption of the family occurred a few months after the date of the lease. The plaintiff claims one-eighth share in the leasehold, the whole family being entitled to one half, the other half belonging to the stranger Sat Narain; The defence of defendant 1 was that the family was no longer a joint Hindu family when the lease was taken, that he represented no one but himself in taking that lease and that he had been in possession of the land in dispute to the exclusion of his brothers, who had no interest, whatever, in the land in dispute.

(3.) Both the Courts below have found that the name of defendant 1 was entered in the lease as representing the entire family. The plaintiff's suit has been accordingly decreed. Defendant 1 has preferred the present second appeal.