Back
N.L.UNTWALIA, R.CHAUDHARY, TARKESHWAR NATH, RAMRATNA SINGH, R.NARASIMHAM
Mt. Ugni – Appellant
Versus
Chowa Mahto – Respondent
What is the admissibility of an unregistered hukumnama as evidence of title? What can an unregistered hukumnama be used for if it is inadmissible as evidence of title? What are the conditions under which actual possession, payment of rent, and acceptance of rent receipts can confer raiyati interest?
Key Points: - An unregistered agricultural lease (hukumnama) is inadmissible as evidence of title [8000031100001][8000031100004]. - An unregistered hukumnama can be used for collateral purposes, such as determining the nature and character of possession [8000031100001][8000031100007]. - Actual possession for cultivation, coupled with recognition of tenancy by the landlord (through acceptance of rent or rent receipts), can confer raiyati interest [8000031100001][8000031100007]. - The Bihar Tenancy Act allows for the creation of raiyati interest through actual possession and landlord's recognition, even without a registered lease [8000031100007]. - Rent receipts, even if the hukumnama is unregistered, can indicate the terms of a raiyati settlement [8000031100001]. - Section 91 of the Evidence Act excludes oral evidence of the terms of a document but not of the existence of a contract or landlord-tenant relationship established by possession and rent payment (!) . - The appellate court reversed the trial court's decision, declaring the plaintiffs' raiyati title and possession [8000031100001]. - The appeal was dismissed, upholding the appellate court's decision (!) . - The plaintiffs established their raiyati interest through evidence of actual possession, payment of rent, and acceptance of rent receipts [8000031100001]. - Possession for more than twelve years, coupled with rent payment and acceptance, can lead to occupancy rights (!) .
R.Narasimham, J.
1. This is an appeal by defendants 1 and 3 against the appellate judgment of the Subordinate Judge, Hazaribagh, reversing the judgment of the Munsif of Giridih and declaring the plaintiffs raiyati title to the suit lands and recovery of possession of the same.
2. The disputed lands consist of 1.57 acres, bearing plots Nos. 95, 96 and 106. appertaining to Khata No. 9 of village Chowra. The area of the entire khata was 2.53 acres, and the khata included the aforesaid three plots and three other plots, bearing Nos. 713, 714 and 758. One Kewal Gorait was the recorded tenant, and the landlord was Raj-mata Hridaya Kumari. The plaintiffs case was that the said Kewal Gorait died issue-less, and thereupon all the said plots came into the khas possession of the landlord. The plaintiffs alleged that, on the 15th Aswin 1343 fasli (October, 1935), the landlord settled the disputed lands, by virtue of a hukumnama (exhibit 2), on a raiyati basis with plaintiffs, 1. 2 and 8 and one Hemlal Mahto (deceased) (the father of plaintiffs 3 to 6 and husband of plaintiff 7) at an annual rental of Rs. 2/-, and put them in possession of the same. They claimed to have continued in pos
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
