Skip to content


Kali Prasad Chatterjee Vs. Rash Behari Laik and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtKolkata
Decided On
Judge
Reported in46Ind.Cas.254
AppellantKali Prasad Chatterjee
RespondentRash Behari Laik and ors.
Cases ReferredAbdul Gani Chaudhury v. Makbul Ali
Excerpt:
bengal land revenue sales act (xi of 1859), section 37, proviso - raiyats holding at fixed rates, whether have protected interest. - .....to recover khas possession of certain plots of land. the only plot we now consider in this appeal is plot no. 3 as the appeal is limited to that. the defendant no. 1 purchased a touzi at a sale for arrears of revenue under act xi of 1859, and the question is whether the plaintiffs in the present case have a protected interest within the meaning of the proviso to section 37 of act xi of 1859. amongst the persons who have a protected interest are raiyats having rights of occupancy at fixed rents. an argument has been addressed to us that the right of occupancy must be ascertained with reference to the bengal tenancy act and that, therefore, a raiyat at a fixed rate of rent cannot have a right of occupancy. we need not enter into a consideration of the matter, because there is a.....
Judgment:

1. This is an appeal by the defendant No. 1 against the decision of the learned Subordinate Judge of Burdwan modifying the decision of the Munsif of Assansole. The suit was brought by the plaintiffs to recover khas possession of certain plots of land. The only plot we now consider in this appeal is plot No. 3 as the appeal is limited to that. The defendant No. 1 purchased a Touzi at a sale for arrears of revenue under Act XI of 1859, and the question is whether the plaintiffs in the present case have a protected interest within the meaning of the proviso to Section 37 of Act XI of 1859. Amongst the persons who have a protected interest are raiyats having rights of occupancy at fixed rents. An argument has been addressed to us that the right of occupancy must be ascertained with reference to the Bengal Tenancy Act and that, therefore, a raiyat at a fixed rate of rent cannot have a right of occupancy. We need not enter into a consideration of the matter, because there is a direct decision of this Court in the case of Abdul Gani Chaudhury v. Makbul Ali 31 Ind. Cas. 19 : 42 C. 745 : 22 C.L.J. 223 : 20 C.W.N. 185 which decides that raiyats holding at fixed rates are persons referred to in Section 37 of Act XI of 1859. It is sufficient if we say that we follow that decision. The present appeal, therefore, fails and must be dismissed with costs.

No. 3296 of 1915.

2. The judgment in Second Appeal No. 1957 of 1915 just delivered will govern this case also. It is accordingly dismissed with costs.


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