SHIB SUHAI SUKUL Vs. KALI KAMAL MAZUMDAR
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
SHIB SUHAI SUKUL
KALI KAMAL MAZUMDAR
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) This was a suit for the concealment of a lease, on the ground of an alleged breach of its conditions. The breach referred to consists in the failure of defendant to plant 2,000 betel-nut-trees within five years from the date of the lease. The lease was executed on the 9th Paush 1264 (1857), and the present suit was brought in 1274 B.S. (1867).
(2.) The only question we have to determine in this special appeal is whether the claim of the plaintiff is barred by the Rule of Limitation prescribed by section 30, Act X of 1859. We are clearly of opinion that it is. There can be no doubt that the plaintiff's cause of action accrued when the breach he complains of actually took place, that is to say, on the 10th of Paush 1269 (1862), and the plaintiff was bound to sue within one year from that date, according to the provisions of the section above cited. This the plaintiff has failed to do.
(3.) It has been said that the plaintiff has got an annually recurring cause of action, but there is nothing in the lease to support such a contention, and the pleader for the respondent has failed to show that there is any authority in support of it.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.