Sarban Lal vs Bhuplal Missir and Others

Das, J.—The tenant is the appellant in a suit for falkar rent by the landlord. It is found by the lower Appellate Court that the falkar rent is claimed in respect of rent free homestead land of the defendants. The Courts below relying upon the entry in the Record of Rights have come to the conclusion that the tenant is liable to pay falkar rent.

The entry in the Record of Rights upon which reliance is placed shows that there are a certain number of trees in the land in respect of which rent is claimed: Three mango trees, one bel tree, 10 palm trees, one tar tree, one guava tree, one plum tree and one lemon tree, and then the entry records as follows: "half share of the tenant and half share of the malik." In my opinion the entry to which reference is made and upon which reliance has been placed in the judgments of the Courts below does not support the case of the plaintiff. It merely records the fact that the landlord is entitled to half the share in the trees mentioned and that the tenant is entitled to the remaining half share in those trees. It does not purport to regulate the rights of the parties as to the fruits and it seems to me that it would be an extraordinary thing if the landlord were entitled to claim rent from the defendant''s rent free land,

The entry in the Record of Rights being out of the way, the question arises whether I should remand the case to enable the Court to decide whether there is any evidence upon which the plaintiff''s right may be found. Only one witness has been examined on behalf of the plaintiff and in order to save a remand I have read that evidence. His evidence does not establish that there is any right in the landlord to claim falkar rent from the tenant. It is quite true that he says that the defendant has paid falkar rent from 1324 to 1327 and that the danabandi papers were regularly prepared; but this portion of the evidence has been disbelieved by the Courts below and I must wholly ignore it from my consideration. There is nothing in his evidence to suggest that there was any agreement between the parties by which falkar rent became payable by the tenant to the plaintiff. That being so, it is not necessary for me to remand the case to the Court below.

I would allow this appeal, set aside the judgments and decrees passed by the Courts below and dismiss the plaintiff''s suit with costs in all the Courts.