DURGA CHURN LAW Vs. HATEEN MANDAL
DURGA CHURN LAW
Click here to view full judgement.
Hill and Brett, JJ -
(1.) These appeals have been preferred against the orders passed by the Subordinate Judge of the 24-Parganas setting aside the order of the Munsif of Baraset dismissing the suits brought by the plaintiffs respondents and remanding them to the Munsif for retrial on the merits. The suits, as well as the appeals, were heard together and were decided by single judgments. These two appeals have been heard together and will be governed by this judgment.
(2.) The appellants are the zemindars of Taraf Chaurashi, Thana Howrah, and a survey of the lands of that estate appears to have been made under the provisions of the Bengal Tenancy Act. In the course of the proceedings, the appellants, the landlords, put in petitions to the Settlement Officer, under Section 104 of the Bengal Tenancy Act, praying that he would, under the second clause of that Section, settle fair and equitable rents in respect of the lands hold by the respondents as tenants. Similar applications were made with regard to other tenants.
(3.) The Settlement Officer held proceedings under the second clause of Section 104, Bengal Tenancy Act, and on the 6 August 1896 and the 25 July 1896 delivered his decisions in the case affecting the respondents in appeals Nos. 166 and 167, respectively, lb appears that notices were duly served on the respondents in those cases, but that they would not offer any evidence. No appeals were preferred against the decisions in those cases.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.