Shaik Titu and others vs Shaik Kalu and others and Abhoy Churn Mookerjee and others

This is an appeal from a decision of the Subordinate Judge of Burdwan, dated the 11th May 1894. The facts, so far as they are necessary for the decision of this suit, may be shortly as follows:-- The Appellants brought a suit against some of the tenants for their share of the rent; they got a decree and so the interest of those tenants and several others were purchased by the Appellants, and as purchasers they got possession through the Court and dispossessed these Plaintiffs who were not parties to that suit, and who were some of the tenants of the holding.

The Appellants state that the suit being under the Bengal Tenancy Act, the limitation is only two years.

We must Lake the Appellants at their word as to how they got possession. They claimed to be in possession as representatives of the persons whose right, title and interest they have purchased. They are, therefore, only there by virtue of their purchase. We think that the suit is not one which falls within the Bengal Tenancy Act, which applies only to a case where a tenant has been dispossessed by his landlord. The result is that the appeal is dismissed with costs.