Judgment

Mahajan J. - This is an appeal from the judgment and decree of the High Court of Bombay dated 9th March 1943 and made in second Appeal No- 717 of 1940 varying the decree of the Assistant Judge, Ahmedabad, in Appeal No. 173 of 1936 reversing the decree of the joint SubJudge, Ahmedabad, in suit No. 830 of 1933.

2. The suit out of which this appeal arises was filed by the respondent firm in ejectment to recover possession of survey Nos. 222, 223, 225 and 226 situate in Rampura in Ahmedabad district and for mesne profits, as early as July 1933 and during its 17 years span of life it had a somewhat chequered career. Those responsible for drawing up the pleadings did not take pains to comprehend correctly as to what they were about and the whole litigation was conducted in a slovenly and slipshod manner. Evidence which should have been produced at the beginning was allowed to be produced at a much late stage after the case went back on remand and the suit was determined by the Assistant Judge on fresh issues and fresh materials. It was in this confused state of the record that it was eventually decided by the High Court and its judgment is by no means satisfactory. The long time taken in deciding the suit which involved determination of o few simple issues is such as is calculated to bring into ridicule the administration of justice.

3. There is a talukdari estate called the Bhankoda estate in Viramgam taluka in Ahmedabad district. It is jointly owned by several talukdars in different shares and comprises twelve villages one of which is Rampura in which the suit lands are situate. By Government Resolution No. 8179, dated 30th August 1912, the estate was taken under Government management under S. 28, Gujarat Talukdars Act (Bombay Act, VI [6] of 1888). The firm of Shah Manilal Maganlal and Bros. (predecessors in interest of the appellant) desired to erect a ginning factory on survey Nos. 223, 225, and 226 and with that object approached the Talukdari Settlement Officer for a permanent lease of these survey numbers. The said officer agreed to grant a lease subject to sanction of Government. By Resolution No. 10795 of 1917 dated 5th September 1917 the Government of Bombay granted the requisite sanction. Exhibit 181 is a certified copy of the letter from the Chief Secretary to Government to the Commissioner and to the Talukdari Settlement Officer and in detail it mentions the various steps taken to effect the transaction.

4. On 9th December1916, an application was made by Shah Manilal Maganlal in writing signed by him to the Talukdari Settlement Officer offering to take a permanent lease of the above mentioned survey numbers on an annual rental of Rs. 290 for the purpose of erecting a ginning factory. On 12th July 1917. the said officer accepted provisionally this offer after taking into consideration the objections raised by some of the talukdars in respect of the grant of a lease. He submitted the papers to Government with the following recommendations : "As the petitioner was in urgent need to start operations during the current ginning season I have in anticipation of Government sanction permitted him to enter upon the land and have the honour to approach you for sanction under S. 27 (A) of the Court of Wards Act, the provisions of which have been made applicable to Talukdari Estates by S. 29(G) of the Gujarat Talukdars Act.

5. The conditions of the lease agreed upon by the parties were annexed with this letter and a copy of the offer was also sent to Government. Exhibit 181 recites the contents of the offer and states the undertaking given by the lessee. There is intrinsic evidence within its contents to show that these writings were signed by the proposer. The Talukdari Settlement Officer in a signed writing accepted the offer and sent it for Government sanction. It further appears that he communicated his acceptance to the lessee and agreed to give a lease if Government gave sanction. The survey numbers in question were