DIBAKAR DAS Vs. SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER
LAWS(CAL)-1983-4-13
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on April 25,1983

DIBAKAR DAS Appellant
VERSUS
SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) This Rule, which was directed against an order of remand made by the Tribunal in Case No.4, B.C.A. of 1976 dated 22nd April, 1977, under the provisions of West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), was obtained without any interim order, on 27th May, 1977.
(2.) The petitioner has stated that he has agricultural lands as mentioned in the petition and one Shri Abdul Sabur Mullick, respondent No.4 was a Bargadar in respect of them. It was his case that the said respondent No.4 having failed to deliver his share of produce in the year of 1379 B.S. the petitioner instituted a proceeding before the Junior Land Reforms Officer concerned, being respondent No.2 for realization of his share of produce, which was registered as Case No.31 (P) of 1973-74. It has further been stated and that would appear from the order in Annexure 'A' that such case was allowed and the respondent No.4, on being found liable, to deliver to the applicant, his share of produce viz. 83 kgs. of paddy and 9 pawns of straw for the year 1379 B.S., the money value whereof was Rs.65/- per quintal of paddy and Rs.45/- per kahon of straw.
(3.) He has stated that respondent No.4, failed to deliver either the produce or the money value of them as indicated above, so the petitioner, instituted a proceeding for termination of cultivation of the Bargadar under section 17(1)(c) and 17(1)(d) of the said Act and the said case was numbered as 101(P) of 1975, in the Court of the Bhag Chas Officer. In such proceedings, the respondent No.4 filed his exceptions and he has stated amongst others, that he was not a defaulter and was willing to deposit the money. The petitioner has stated that respondent No.2 while disposing of the case as above held that the respondent No.4 failed to comply with the order of 1st August, 1974 as made in Case No.31 (P) of 1973 under section 16(4) of the said Act and he also found, that there was no bar to terminate the cultivation of the suit lands under section 17(1)(d) of the said Act. Such order was made on 15th October, 1976 and thereby, the respondent No.4 was directed to vacate the lands in question by the end of Phalgun, 1382 B.S.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.