TMI Blog1949 (1) TMI 4X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... permanent injunction restraining the deft. 1 from manufacturing bricks from the earth of the land described in Sch. A also for recovery of RS. 61-8-0 as damages against the deft. for removing the earth in the form of bricks. 2. The facts found by the Cts., below are that the pltf. is a landlord he let out survey plot No. 132 in village Galudih to deft. 1 as a raiyat. The deft. 1 dug out the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... p the earth on the holding that he can even throw if; away. Assuming that this argument is correct, in the present case it has been found that the tenant did not throw away the earth but he sold it in the form of bricks to strangers. This certainly he is not entitled to do: see Purnendu Narayan Singh v. Narendra Nath, 23 P. L. T. 662 : (A. I. R. (30) 1943 Pat. 31); nor is the tenant entitled to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the earth because the finding is that he dug the land for the purposes of improvement. If the deft. at any time is found to be misusing the land in that case a proper case for injunction besides damages may arise. How can we restrain the tenant from digging the earth then for disposing of that earth when the pltf. has not asked the deft to deliver that earth to him or when he has not made an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
