Sukhari Nonia and Others vs Ramkhelawan Thakur and Others

Ross, J.—The only point urged in support of this application is, that the. Magistrate'' has dealt with a larger area of land than is included in the proceedings drawn up in the case, and has, therefore, exceeded his jurisdiction as was held in Amriteshwari Debi v. Darpa Narain Das 7 C.W.N. 558. The proceedings were drawn in respect of 5 bighas to kothas and 18 dhurs. The, Magistrate deals with 7 bighas of land settled by Karnoul Factory with certain persons. He then proceeds to deal with the land of each of these persons. He says that the first party does not claim the lands pi Khobhari and Dukhni (1 bigha 10 coitas in each case) and he confirms these persons in their possession. He then says that the second party do not contest the possession of first party of 1 bigha of Dhan''s land. This reduces the area in dispute to 3 bighas and he deals with these three bighas and confirms the first party in possession. It is, therefore, clear that he has passed orders about the possession of at least 6 bighas. It is said on behalf of the opposite party that there was no dispute about the lands of Khobhari and Dukhni and the real dispute was only about 4 bighas and, therefore, the Magistrate has not gone beyond the land dealt with in the proceedings. But he, has in fact passed orders about 6 bighas, and it is impossible to be sure with regard to any of the really contested area whether that was included within the proceedings-or not.

The whole order is, therefore, bad and must be set aside.