In Brief
A farmer (appellant) was a defendant in a partition suit filed by relatives seeking his eviction from 10 acres of 'bane' lands (revenue-free lands attached to private wet lands). The appellant claimed he owned certain wet lands and was therefore entitled to a share. The trial court and High Court found, based on his own testimony, that he was allotted lands in a different village and had failed to prove possession of any wet lands in the suit village. The Supreme Court upheld the dismissal, finding no error in the concurrent factual findings and holding the appeal lacking merit."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.