The Madras Revenue Register Volume 5 baixar o livro de graça

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1871 Excerpt: ...Regular Appeal No. 21 of 1870, from a decreo of the Subordinate Judge of Tipporah, dated the 15th December 18G9. The Subordinate Judge found that the chur in dispute was that claimed by the plaintiffs in 1859 as chur Sahoochea, and that, in spite of the opposition of the predecessors in title of the defendants, the plaintiffs obtained from the Government a recognition of their right to that chur. He finds, however, that the plaintiffs never had possession of that chur; but that the defendants had possession of it in 18C6, as found by the Magistrate in a criminal proceeding in that year, though the Subordinate Judge considers that the defendant's possession had been then only recently obtained. There is a great deal in the judgment about the defendant having had de facto possession andthe I plaintiffs having had "symbolical" possession, which I do not precisely understand. The Subordinate Judge, however, expresses a decided J opinion that "the witnesses and cabooleuts and "sunnuds produced by the litigants are all false." I Lastly, he adds that "a glance at the map pre j "pared by the Civil Court Ameen in the case of "1866 between these very litigants will show that " the channel between the main group (i.e., the I " plaintiffs' acknowledged estate) and the new "formation (i.e., the disputed chur) is fordable." Accordingly lie gives the plaintiffs a decree. The Subordinate Judge having disbelieved all the oral testimony (and false to a very considerable extent it undoubtedly was), we are in this I Court thrown back entirely on the various proceedings of the Revenue officers in which the state of the numerous churs in this neighbourhood is sometimes directly, sometimes incidentally, des, cribed. I th...