Skip to content


Mani Lal Seal and ors. Vs. Bhola Nath Basu and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtKolkata
Decided On
Judge
Reported inAIR1919Cal391(1),50Ind.Cas.975
AppellantMani Lal Seal and ors.
RespondentBhola Nath Basu and ors.
Cases ReferredBhagabati Debya v. Basanta Kumari Debi
Excerpt:
landlord and tenant - rent, whether includes interest on arrears--landlord, whether entitled to appropriate payments on account of rent as against interest on arrears of rent. - .....entitled to appropriate the amount or part thereof that has been paid and received by them on account of rent against the interest becoming due on the rent? as regards the majority of cases there is no evidence at all that any direction was given by the tenant as to how the money should be appropriated. but in two cases, namely, as regards the payments that were made by letters exhibits 5 (1) and d (1), there seems to have been an express direction given by the tenant that the payments were to be credited to the rents that were then due. in those cases, of course, it is quite dear that the landlord having accepted the payments by the tenants with such a direction, was bound to appropriate the money so paid on account of the rents mentioned in the letters forwarding the payments. in.....
Judgment:

Earnest Fletcher, J.

1. This is an appeal preferred by the plaintiffs against the decision of the learned Subordinate Judge of Howrah, dated the 11th January 1917. The suit was brought by the plaintiffs for their share of the rent for the years 1319 to 1322. The plaintiffs have an 8 annas 16-gandas share in the property and no question as to their having a separate collection arises. One point and only one point arises in this appeals and that is this: Are the plaintiffs entitled to appropriate the amount or part thereof that has been paid and received by them on account of rent against the interest becoming due on the rent? As regards the majority of cases there is no evidence at all that any direction was given by the tenant as to how the money should be appropriated. But in two cases, namely, as regards the payments that were made by letters Exhibits 5 (1) and D (1), there seems to have been an express direction given by the tenant that the payments were to be credited to the rents that were then due. In those cases, of course, it is quite dear that the landlord having accepted the payments by the tenants with such a direction, was bound to appropriate the money so paid on account of the rents mentioned in the letters forwarding the payments. In other cases, although there were no letters preceding the receipts, the receipts show that the landlord had, in fact, appropriated the payments on account of rent. But it is urged now that the word rent' includes interest. The cases, in this Court are opposed to that view. It is sufficient to refer to the case of Bhagabati Debya v. Basanta Kumari Debi 5 C.L.J. 69 : 11 C.W.N. 110. There is nothing to show in this case that the tenants as the parties to the suit understood that the word rent used in the receipts was intended to be used in any other meaning than its natural meaning, namely, rent and not rent including interest. In this case, nothing has been shown to suggest that the landlords were entitled to appropriate payments that were made on account of rent as against interest becoming due on the arrears of rent. I agree with the result arrived at by the learned Subordinate Judge. The present appeal, therefore, fails and must be dismissed with costs.

2. The cross-objection is not pressed and is dismissed without costs.

Beachcroft, J.

3. I agree.


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