Back
1927 Supreme(Nagpur) 224
HIGH COURT OF NAGPUR
Prideaux
BANI BAI – Appellant
Versus
MAHADEO – Respondent
Decided on : 10-11-1927
Prideaux, A J C—the proprietors of the mahal or patti for which he is appointed, and it is argued that the civil Courts cannot take cognizance of the case. It is further contended that under Section 229, Clause (p) of that Act, any claim in connexion with the office or remuneration of the muccadam is not cognisable by a civil Court. It does not seem to me necessary to enter into these contentions; for it appears to me that the suit should be dismissed on the ground that it was brought for recovery of the lambardari haq; it was not for the recovery of the muccadami haq which has been decreed by the lower appellate Court. This change in the case in the lower appellate Court has prevented suitable issues being raised in the trial Court; and if a plaintiff is so careless as to make a mistake of this nature, although he may be repeating only a mistake made in previous proceedings, he has only himself to blame if his case fails. The relief decreed is not the relief sought; the case found by the lower appellate Court was not the case tried; and under these circumstances I think that the plaintiff's claim should be dismissed with costs. I set aside the decree of the lower appellate Court and dismiss the case with costs.
Final Result : Dismissed
