DALAL
Suraj Prasad – Appellant
Versus
Emperor – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Dalal, J. - I am afraid that the Sessions Judge has not got a grip of the facts of the case and misunderstood them. There can be no doubt; that the patwari on 17th September 1928, gave a wrong copy of certain entries in the village records to the complainant Ram Nandan. The wrongness of the entries consisted in the patwari (appellant) not noting in the copy that besides Mt. Jhagri there were other tenants of the plots in suit. It is, however, important to remember that the complainant Ram Nandan had already purchased what he considered a fixed-rate tenancy from Mt. Jhagri prior to 17th September, that is, five days prior, on 12th September 1928. It cannot, therefore, be said that the wrong copy induced him to spend money in making the purchase.
2. On 24th September he sued not only Mt. Jhagri but the others whose names appeared in the records for a declaration that the others were not tenants of the land. This suit was brought for a declaration u/s 123, Tenancy Act of 1926. His suit was dismissed on the ground that Mt. Jhagri was not a fixed-rate tenant and had no right of transfer. The incorrect copy was filed by the complainant in the suit which he filed on 24th September.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.