Skip to content


Beni Madhub Roy Vs. Jaod Ali Sircar and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtKolkata
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1890)ILR17Cal390
AppellantBeni Madhub Roy
RespondentJaod Ali Sircar and anr.
Excerpt:
bengal tenancy act (viii of 1885), sections 65, 170 - civil procedure code (act xiv of 1882), section 278--attachment of tenure in execution of decree for arrears of rent by a fractional co-sharer--fractional co-sharer--arrears of rent of separate share. - .....of the rent of his separate share, such an attachment as is contemplated by section 170 of the bengal tenancy act?'2. in our opinion the answer to that question must be in the negative. section 170 of the bengal tenancy act gives certain privileges to persons who have taken proceedings under that act for the purpose of recovering their rents; and section 188 says that, where several persons are joint landlords, and when anything under this act is authorised to be done, they must all join in doing it. that shows, in our opinion, that where landlords are seeking to take the benefit of this act, they must act in concert; and where one of several co-sharers in a zemindari thinks fit to pursue his remedies to recover his share of the rent, he must pursue them under the ordinary law of the.....
Judgment:

W. Comer Petheram, C.J.

1. The question which has been referred to the Full Bench in these rules is: 'Is an attachment of a tenure or holding, in execution of a decree obtained by a fractional co-sharer for arrears of the rent of his separate share, such an attachment as is contemplated by Section 170 of the Bengal Tenancy Act?'

2. In our opinion the answer to that question must be in the negative. Section 170 of the Bengal Tenancy Act gives certain privileges to persons who have taken proceedings under that Act for the purpose of recovering their rents; and Section 188 says that, where several persons are joint landlords, and when anything under this Act is authorised to be done, they must all join in doing it. That shows, in our opinion, that where landlords are seeking to take the benefit of this Act, they must act in concert; and where one of several co-sharers in a zemindari thinks fit to pursue his remedies to recover his share of the rent, he must pursue them under the ordinary law of the country, and independently of the Bengal Tenancy Act. For this reason, we answer this question in the negative. The result is that both Rules will he discharged with costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //