9911796707
TMI Blog1907 (2) TMI 2X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the 18th of October 1901, of property specified in the plaint, was void and claimed possession of the property detailed in that deed. He put in an alternative claim, that if the plaintiff was not entitled to possession of the buildings upon the land, a decree for possession of the land itself might be passed in his favour and the defendants ordered to remove the materials of the buildings and tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were not tried under the following circumstances. The plaintiff in his examination under Section 117 of the Code stated his inability to define the lands which were included in the lease. In consequence of this the learned Subordinate Judge passed an order on the 18th of September 1903 directing the plaintiff to amend his plaint by giving the boundaries of the land in excess of the 12 kachha bigh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w found that the land which was demised to Mr. Frederic Wilson was demised to him on a permanent lease for building purposes and that he had erected permanent buildings on the laud, and that he and his successors in title had continued to hold the land under the lease up to the present time. 4. The plaintiff appellant has appealed to this Court and raised a number of grounds of appeal, one bein ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... follows: 1. What were the boundaries and what was the extent of the land given by the plaintiff's predecessor to the father of defendant (2)? 4. Did the defendant (2) sell to defendant (1) any excess area of land over and above that area which had been given by the zamindar to his father, and what are the boundaries and area of such excess? 5. We remand these issues to the Court of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
