Kunja Singh vs Barho Ray

Bucknill, J.—This was an application in Civil Revisional Jurisdiction. It is a very simple matter. The applicant was a lessee of certain property from one Babu Sukhraj Ray of a mauza called Pipra. On this property there was a tenant named Babu Hira Lal Singh, who was recorded in the recent Survey Record of Rights as the occupancy tenant. The applicant brought a rent suit against this man and obtained a rent decree in 1921. He executed this decree and the 18th July last was the date fixed for sale. On the 17th of that month a petition was filed on behalf of two persons named Barhamdeo Ray and Sita Ram for permission to deposit the decretal amount on the ground that they, by a compromise effected in connection with some litigation with Babu Hira Lal Singh, had obtained a transfer from him to them of his holding. Now, no authority is, I think, really needed, although, as a matter of fact, there is ample authority to that effect for the proposition that in circumstances such as these it is necessary that notice must be given to the judgment-creditor and to the judgment-debtor of an application of this nature, and further that an adjudication must be given as to whether the deposit can or cannot be made by those who desire to make it. Now, the Munsif of 2nd Court of Begusarai seems to have dealt with this matter on the 18th July last year. But it is now common ground and admitted, both by the learned Vakil for the respondents here as well as by the learned Vakil for the applicants, that it would appear that the Munsif dealt with the matter ex-parte. His order simply reads:-

Barhamdeo Ray and Sita Ram alleging themselves to be interested persons apply for permission to deposit the decretal amount. Heard pleader, Ordered-permitted to deposit.

No notice seems to have been given either to the applicant or to judgment-debtor and certainly no adjudication has been made as to whether it was proper that the deposit of this decretal amount should be accepted. As a matter of fact a very serious question is in issue as to whether the holding was transferable by custom or not. Under these circumstances, obviously the only course open to me is to send the matter back to the Munsif. The necessary notices must be given and the matter must be investigated and adjudicated upon in accordance with law. The order of the Munsif of the 18th July 1922 will be set aside. The costs of this case will abide the result of the investigation.