AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
3 paragraphs · 96 words
1.
The case quoted by the Subordinate Judge was under the Revenue Recovery Act, not under Act VIII of 1865.
2.
The suit, however, is not for rent, but for contribution on account of a payment made by plaintiff in defendants'' interest. There is no provision of law making such a claim a charge upon Immovable property. Article 99 of the Limitation Act applies.
3.
The decree of the Subordinate Judge must be reversed and that of the District Munsif restored. The appellants are entitled to their costs in this and in the lower Appellate Court.