BIPRA DAS DEY Vs. RAJARAM BANERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Rule calling upon the opposite party to show cause why the order of the Munsif of Bankura, dated the 25 January 1909, should not be set aside.

(2.) It appears that the opposite party who were the plaintiffs in the Court below brought a suit along with the pro forma defendants, who were their co-sharers, for arrears of rent due on two holdings. These pro forma defendants upon their refusing to join the other plaintiffs in the suit were subsequently transposed to the category of defendants. The decree which the plaintiff obtained was one for a share of the rent due to them alone. In the execution of that decree, the two holdings were attached. Thereupon, the petitioner preferred a claim under Section 278 of the Civil Procedure Code. The opposite party objected that the claim was barred under Section 170 of the Bengal Tenancy Act. The Court below has given effect to that objection.

(3.) I am of opinion that the order of the Munsif cannot be sustained.