Robert Stuart, C.J., Pearson, Turner and Spankie, JJ.
1. We have considered the language of the Small Cause Court Act, and hold that the claim brought in this suit does not fall within any of the classes of suits made cognizable by those Courts. The claim is for a zamindari due customarily payable, it is not a claim for money duo on contract, nor for personal property or the value thereof, nor for damages. The opinion at which we have arrived is in accordance with the more numerous ridings of this Court, and with the practice of the Court to allow special appeals in such cases although the sum in dispute is of less amount than Its. 500. It must not he understood that we impugn the ruling that, where 'chaharum' is payable in virtue of a contract, the claim is of a nature triable by a Court of Small Causes.
2. The Division Bench, upon the return of the case with the above finding, dismissed the appeal on the grounds detailed in the judgment of the Court delivered by-
3. The Full Bench being of opinion that a claim for 'haq-i-chaharum' is not cognizable by a Court of Small Causes we may entertain the appeal.
4. The first plea alone is urged that the claim is bad for misjoinder. This plea has for sufficient reasons boon overruled by the Courts below. The sale-moneys, although the produce of the sale of more than one lot, have been taken out of Court by the decree-holders, the appellants, and they must give up to the respondent, the zamindar, his duo in respect of each sale. The causes of action though several are between the same parties. The appeal fails and is dismissed with costs.