Skip to content


Nitai Pada Das and ors. Vs. Sarat Kumari Dasi and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty
CourtKolkata
Decided On
Reported inAIR1927Cal96
AppellantNitai Pada Das and ors.
RespondentSarat Kumari Dasi and anr.
Cases ReferredKrishna Kanta Ghose v. Jadu Kasya
Excerpt:
- .....homestead lands. it has been found that the defendants are raiyats of the village and that they held their homestead otherwise than as a part of their holding as raiyats. the whole of the homestead is held, under persons who are themselves raiyats and, consequently the position of the defendants as regards the homestead is that they are under-raiyats. the first court dismissed the suit but the second court has decreed it for the reason stated in the judgment of that court.3. the facts of this case are identical with the facts in the case of krishna kanta ghose v. jadu kasya [1915] 19 c.w.n. 914. it was there held that according to the provisions of section 182 the provisions regulating the homestead, would be the provisions which regulate the raiyati. this decision, to which i myself.....
Judgment:

Greaves, J.

1. This is an appeal by the defendants from a decision of the Subordinate Judge of Nadia, reversing a decision of the Additional Munsif of Chuadanga.

2. The suit was brought by the plaintiff to eject the defendants from certain: homestead lands. It has been found that the defendants are raiyats of the village and that they held their homestead otherwise than as a part of their holding as raiyats. The whole of the homestead is held, under persons who are themselves raiyats and, consequently the position of the defendants as regards the homestead is that they are under-raiyats. The first Court dismissed the suit but the second Court has decreed it for the reason stated in the judgment of that Court.

3. The facts of this case are identical with the facts in the case of Krishna Kanta Ghose v. Jadu Kasya [1915] 19 C.W.N. 914. It was there held that according to the provisions of Section 182 the provisions regulating the homestead, would be the provisions which regulate the raiyati. This decision, to which I myself was a party, seems to me in accordance with the natural meaning of the words of Section 182 and on further consideration I am not prepared to say that the decision is wrong. This being so the present case is concluded by the case of Krishna Kanta Ghose v. Jadu Kasya [1915] 19 C.W.N. 914 to which I have just referred.

4. In the result, the appeal succeeds and we restore the decision of the Munsif and the appellants will be entitled to the costs incurred in this Court and in both the lower Courts. No other question-arises in the appeal.

B.B. Ghose, J.

5. I agree.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //