Last Updated on
1. The Court of first instance has not kept in view the distinction between a road and a public road, the latter of which alone is vested in the District Board. We have not been referred to any evidence, nor do the lower Courts refer to any, to support the finding that the Donka in question is a public road. We think it desirable to make the District Board a party to the suit for the final determination of that question. We accordingly set aside the decrees of the Courts below, direct the Munsif to make the District Board a party to the suit and proceed to decide the case according to law.
2. We may point out that the Munsif seems to have assumed that the property being poramboke vests in the zemindar. It is not all kinds of property that is poramboke, which is so vested. Under Regulation 25 of 1802 he would not be entitled to any lakhiraj property.
3. The Courts below, therefore, must decide without assuming whether the Donka belongs to the plaintiff. Costs will abide the result.