1927 (3) TMI 1 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues:
1. Nature of the appellants' interest in the land - whether mere tenants at will or entitled to a permanent inheritable right.
2. Validity of a declaration as evidence in the absence of registration under the Indian Registration Act.
3. Dispute regarding the tenancy status and rent enhancement.
4. Whether the finding of permanent tenancy by the District Judge is open to review as a question of law or fact.

Analysis:
1. The suit involved a dispute over the nature of the appellants' interest in a plot of land in Delhi - whether they were mere tenants at will or had a permanent inheritable right subject to a fixed rent. The High Court reversed the District Judge's decree, leading to an appeal to the Privy Council.
2. The respondent sought to rely on a declaration from 1871 as evidence of the appellants' tenancy status. However, the declaration was deemed inadmissible due to lack of registration under the Indian Registration Act, a point upheld by all courts involved.
3. The appellants resisted rent enhancement, claiming a permanent tenancy, but the courts rejected this argument. The High Court found no permanent tenancy established based on various factors, including the terms of a sale deed, written statements from previous proceedings, and continued payment of enhanced rent.
4. The appellants contended that the finding of permanent tenancy by the District Judge was not open to review as a question of fact. However, the Privy Council opined that the tenancy status was a legal inference from facts, making it a mixed question of law and fact, allowing review by the High Court, which upheld the decision.

Overall, the Privy Council affirmed the High Court's decision, concluding that no permanent tenancy was established. The appellants were given a choice to accept compensation for the buildings on the land or face removal, with a suggestion to extend the election period. The appeal was dismissed with costs.