Skip to content


Ramlal Gothi Vs. Roy Chowdhury Satish Chandra Mustapi and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtKolkata
Decided On
Judge
Reported in53Ind.Cas.411
AppellantRamlal Gothi
RespondentRoy Chowdhury Satish Chandra Mustapi and ors.
Excerpt:
bengal tenancy act (viii b.c. of 1885), sections 105 - civil procedure code (act v of 1908,), section 115--order assessing fair and equitable rent--jurisdiction--revision-high court, interference by. - .....is an appeal and also a rule against an order under section 105 of the bengal tenancy act fixing a fair and equitable rent. the only point urged is that the lower courts acted without jurisdiction in assessing the fair and equitable rent without taking any evidence. it appears, however, that the defendants, although they did not appear at the hearing, filed a statement in which the figures on which fair and equitable rent was assessed were not disputed. these figures were sufficient material for the assistant settlement officer and the special judge to come to a finding. whether that finding is correct and whether the rent assessed u fair and equitable, is a question into which this court cannot go, if the lower courts have jurisdiction and i hold that they had jurisdiction.2......
Judgment:

Newbould, J.

1. This is an appeal and also a Rule against an order under Section 105 of the Bengal Tenancy Act fixing a fair and equitable rent. The only point urged is that the lower Courts acted without jurisdiction in assessing the fair and equitable rent without taking any evidence. It appears, however, that the defendants, although they did not appear at the hearing, filed a statement in which the figures on which fair and equitable rent was assessed were not disputed. These figures were sufficient material for the Assistant Settlement Officer and the Special Judge to come to a finding. Whether that finding is correct and whether the rent assessed u fair and equitable, is a question into which this Court cannot go, if the lower Courts have jurisdiction and I hold that they had jurisdiction.

2. Accordingly this appeal must be dismissed and this Rule discharged with costs. No separate Pleader's fee is allowed in the Rule.


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