JUDGMENT

Sen, J. - The facts of the case clearly show that the suit, as framed by the plaintiff, was misconceived and that the civil Court was not competent to grant the reliefs claimed by the plaintiff in the suit. The plaintiff came to the Court on the allegation that in mauza Inampur, mahal Safed, the plaintiff was the owner and sharer of 1 bigha, 5 biswas and 8 biswansis in khewat No. 9 of 3 bighas and 14 biswas, and defendants 1 to 3 were the cosharers in 10 biswas 9 biswansis and 12 kachwansis, and in khewat No. 25 of 2 bighas and 1 biswa of the same village the plaintiff was a co-sharer in 7 biswas and 12 biswansis and defendants 1 to 3 were the cosharers in 10 biswas 1 biswansi and 7 kachwansis. The plaintiff alleged that the cosharers were in possession of separate plots, that certain plots specified in the plaint were in the possession of the plaintiff and that the defendant had no right to realize the rent of the plaintiff's share, as each co-sharer realized rent from the tenants to the extent of his share. The principal relief claimed in the plaint was that, on establishment of the plaintiff's right, the plaintiff may be put in proprietary possession of 8 biswas pukhta l