RAJARUTHNA NAIDU Vs. NARASIMHACHARIAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are appeals from decrees of the District Court of Chingleput dismissing suits under Section 9 of Act VIII of 1865 for the acceptance of pattas.

(2.) For the purposes of the point of law which was argued before us, the following facts may be taken to have been found or admitted.

(3.) In 1898 the Shrotriemdar gave to the plaintiff a power of attorney authorising the plaintiff to exercise the rights of the Shrotriemdar under the Act of 1865. This power, being coupled with an interest, was in law irrevocable. The Shrotriemdar purported to revoke this power of attorney and gave notice to the defendants that he had done so. He then tendered pattas to the defendants which the defendants accepted. At the time the defendants accepted the pattas they were aware that the Shrotriemdar's right to tender the pattas was disputed by the plaintiff. The plaintiff subsequently presented pattas for the same fasli and the defendants refused to accept them on the ground that they had already accepted pattas from the Shrotriemdar.