Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.52 seconds)
Sm. Ashamayi Basu, W/O Charu Chandra ... vs Baranagore Jute Factory Co. Ltd. And ... on 19 May, 1939 cites

Makhan Lal Paul vs Rup Chand Maji And Ors. on 7 March, 1929

In a case of this sort in which the plaintiff is seeking to recover possession of property on the basis of a revepue sale the initial onus must lie on the plaintiff to show that the land lies within his regularly assessed estate or mahal and not merely that it lies within the ambit of his zamindari, Jagdeo Narain Singh v. Baldeo Singh (1922) 9 A.I.R. P.C. 272, Sashi Bhusan v. Abdulla , Makhan Lal v. Rup Chand . Having regard to the fact that the Ka schedule land is recorded as being niskar in the Record of Rights and in view of the presumptive correctness of this entry it cannot, in my opinion, be said that the plaintiff has discharged the initial onus which lies upon her in this matter. Even if it be assumed however that she has succeeded in discharging this onus the position is that the entry in the Record of Rights is in favour of the defendants. This fact would, in my opinion, have the effect of throwing the onus back on the plaintiff in order to prove that the Ka schedule land did not appertain to a niskar tenure. This onus the plaintiff has failed to discharge. In this view of the case I am of opinion that the decision of the lower Appellate Court with regard to the Ka schedule land is correct.
Calcutta High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 7 - Full Document

Kanta Mohan Mallik And Ors. vs Makhan Santra on 2 August, 1934

6. As already pointed out, the initial onus must lie upon the plaintiff to show that the land in suit lies within her regularly assessed estate or mahal. Having regard to the entry contained in the Kecord of Rights this initial onus appears to have been discharged. The question then arises as to whether or not it can be said that the defendants have succeeded in discharging the onus which lies on them to prove that the Kha Schedule land appertains to a niskar tenure. In holding that the defendants have succeeded in discharging this onus the learned Additional District Judge adverts to the fact that the defendants had been in long possession of this land without payment of rent and he holds that this is a circumstance which should be taken into consideration as evidence in support of the defendants' contention. The lower appellate Court places considerable reliance upon the decision of R.C. Mitter J. in Kanta Mohan Mallik v. Makhan Santra (1935) 39 C.W.N. 277. In that case the learned Judge was dealing with an appeal which arose with reference to a suit brought by the plaintiffs for the assessment of rent and he pointed out that long possession without any demand or payment of rent would be evidence of a grant of a rent-free title. It is true that in a case for the assessment of rent evidence of long possession without payment of rent might in certain circumstances lead to an inference that a former proprietor of the estate had created a rent-free title in respect of the land in suit. But even in such a case it would be essential that such evidence should be of a definite character and cover a sufficiently long period to allow such an inference to be drawn.
Calcutta High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

Sashi Bhusan Hazra vs Kazi Abdulla And Ors. on 22 May, 1923

In a case of this sort in which the plaintiff is seeking to recover possession of property on the basis of a revepue sale the initial onus must lie on the plaintiff to show that the land lies within his regularly assessed estate or mahal and not merely that it lies within the ambit of his zamindari, Jagdeo Narain Singh v. Baldeo Singh (1922) 9 A.I.R. P.C. 272, Sashi Bhusan v. Abdulla , Makhan Lal v. Rup Chand . Having regard to the fact that the Ka schedule land is recorded as being niskar in the Record of Rights and in view of the presumptive correctness of this entry it cannot, in my opinion, be said that the plaintiff has discharged the initial onus which lies upon her in this matter. Even if it be assumed however that she has succeeded in discharging this onus the position is that the entry in the Record of Rights is in favour of the defendants. This fact would, in my opinion, have the effect of throwing the onus back on the plaintiff in order to prove that the Ka schedule land did not appertain to a niskar tenure. This onus the plaintiff has failed to discharge. In this view of the case I am of opinion that the decision of the lower Appellate Court with regard to the Ka schedule land is correct.
Calcutta High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 5 - Full Document
1