Back
1932 Supreme(Oudh) 20
HIGH COURT OF OUDH
Ghirao - Appellant
Versus
Ram Naili - Respondent
Decided On : 12-10-1932
JUDGMENT
1. The decision of these appeals may be approached from a point of view slightly different from what is taken in the order of reference. The facts are as follows:
In execution of a mortgage decree the plaintiff-respondents purchased a four annas share in the village of Qaemjot at an auction sale on 20th June 1928 as against the judgment-debtor Uma Shankar, one of the defendants in the suits out of which these appeals arise. It is agreed that the sale was confirmed within the usual period of thirty days. It has been found that on the date of the sale the other defendants to the suit held lands in question on a grain rent but that subsequently, that is on 30th June, Uma Shankar altered the rent in kind into rent in cash. The object of these suits is to obtain a declaration that the act of Uma Shankar in converting the rent from grain into cash was unlawful. Every issue raised in the case on the merits has been decided by both the Courts below against the appellants who are the tenants of the lands in question. The Court of first instance however dismissed the plaintiffs' suit on the ground that its cognizance by a civil Court was barred. The lower appellate Court disagreed with that view and decreed the suit.
2. In our opinion the point to be decided is as to whether Uma Shankar had any title to the lands in question on the date on which he made the conversion in rent. If he had, then his act was an act of a landlord. If he had not, then his act was an act of a trespasser; and in the latter event his act as such could only be questioned in the civil Court. There is no doubt that under the provisions of Section 65, Civil P.C., the title to the mortgaged share vested in the purchaser from the time when the property was sold. It follows that Uma Shankar had no title left in the share since the date of the sale. His act of conversion was therefore an act of a trespasser and was accordingly liable to be questioned in a civil Court. We accordingly dismiss these appeals with costs.
