R.P.MOOKERJEE, J. - (1.) THIS is an appeal by the defendant and arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiffs claiming rent for the demised premises.
(2.) THE plaintiffs claimed to be entitled to recover arrears of rent with cess and damages for the years 1349 to 1352 B. S. The only question for determination in this appeal is whether the defendant is entitled to a total suspension of the rent or a proportionate abatement of the same for the period in suit, on the ground that the plaintiffs landlords had dispossessed the tenant from one of the plots in suit, in spite of protests from the tenant defendant. The learned 'Munsif found that out of a total area of 7.48 acres constituting the jama in suit the landlords had dispossessed the defendant in respect of C. S. Plot No. 816 covering an area of .04 acre. He observed : 'It seems to me that the plaintiffs finding the position of the C. S. Plot No. 816 vis a vis their own plot No. 802 actuated by greed simply illegally and highhandedly grabbed the C. S. Plot No. 816 within their own C. S. Plot No. 802 in 1349 B. S. in the hope that the defendant who is a Pathsala Pandit would tolerate it and would at least get a proportionate abatement of rent.'
(3.) THE rent for the demised land as fixed by the kabuliyat Ex. 1 was a lump rent for the entire land and it was held that the plaintiffs were not entitled to any rent from the defendant until C. S. Plot No. 816 was restored. The suit was accordingly dismissed. The plaintiffs' story that they had been possessing C. S. Plot No. 816 on the strength of a usufructuary mortgage was found not to have been substantiated.;