RAJA BRAJA SUNDAR DEB versus MONI BEHARA AND OTHERS

RAJA BRAJA SUNDAR DEB versus MONI BEHARA AND OTHERS

Rights to fish in the disputed fishery cannot be acquired by prescription, adverse possession, or lost grant in favour of a fluctuating and indeterminate body of villagers; only those defendants who were parties to section 145, Cr.P.C. proceedings or their successors are entitled to remain in possession on payment of fixed annual rent; the plaintiff is entitled to exclusive right except during Hilsa fishing season when specified defendants have exclusive right.

Parties
Appellant: Raja Braja Sundar Deb; Respondents: Moni Behara and Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
27 March 1951
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Judgment and Decree of Patna High Court; Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; decree of High Court modified
Legal Topics
Fisheries, Adverse Possession, Prescription, Lost Grant, Limitation, Injunctions, Section 145 Criminal Procedure Code
Property Law Civil Procedure Fisheries Adverse Possession Prescription Lost Grant Limitation Injunctions +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Raja Braja Sundar Deb

Appellant

Moni Behara and Others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Judgment and Decree of Patna High Court; Supreme Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether fishermen of certain villages acquired a right to fish in the disputed fishery by grant, prescription, custom, or adverse possession
  2. 2 Effect of proceedings under section 145, Criminal Procedure Code on possession
  3. 3 Whether acquisiton of rights by an indeterminate and fluctuating body is legally sustainable

Ratio Decidendi

Rights to fish in the disputed fishery cannot be acquired by prescription, adverse possession, or lost grant in favour of a fluctuating and indeterminate body of villagers; only those defendants who were parties to section 145, Cr.P.C. proceedings or their successors are entitled to remain in possession on payment of fixed annual rent; the plaintiff is entitled to exclusive right except during Hilsa fishing season when specified defendants have exclusive right.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; decree of High Court modified

Orders

  • Plaintiff entitled to fish in disputed fishery except during Hilsa season (Margasir to Baisakh) when defendants 1,2,3,5,6,7,9,12 have exclusive right to fish for Hilsa on payment of Rs. 135-7-0 per annum until enhanced or possession lost
  • Defendants restrained from interfering with plaintiff's fishing right except for those specified with exclusive Hilsa rights