Baijnath vs Mohammad Ismail - 1922 Supreme(All) 389

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1922 Supreme(All) 389

KANHAIYA LAL, LINDSAY
Baijnath – Appellant
Versus
Mohammad Ismail – Respondent

JUDGMENT

1. We have heard Counsel on both sides in this appeal and have some to the conclusion that the judgment of the lower Appellate Court is wrong and matt be set aside and the decree of the Court of first instance restored.

2. The suit was a suit in ejectment brought by two plaintiffs, Baijnath and L. Bankey Lal.

3. It appears that there is in Agra a body known as the Islamia Committee which is entrusted with the duty of looking after the Jama Masjid.

4. It appears that attached to the Masjid there are certain shops and for the purpose of providing funds for the upkeep of the mosque, it has been the practice of this Committee to wake arrangements for the leasing out of these shops so as to secure a regular income.

5. In their plaint the plaintiffs staled that they were the lessees of these shops on behalf of the Islamia Committee under a lease executed in their favour for a period of five years with effect from the 1st April 1919. The allegation was that Muhammad Ismail was in possession at the time the lease was granted in favour of the plaintiffs. He was told to quit but refused to give up possession: hence this suit for ejectment and also for damages in the way of rent for ocaup

Click Here to Read the rest of this document