P.B.MUKHARJEE, J. - (1.) THE plaintiff in this suit claims possession of the two cinema houses, named Sree Cinema and Uttara Cinema, formerly known as Cornwallis theatre and Crown Cinema respectively at No. 138/1 and 138/2 Cornwallis Street, Calcutta, on the ground of forfeiture. The defendant company is alleged to have committed breach of the covenant in the lease between the plaintiff and the defendant company dated 19 -8 -1933, which provides that the lessee shall keep a box, not less than four seats in each of the said cinema houses at the disposal of the lessor for the use of herself or other person or persons authorised by her or on her behalf and if the lessor so desires in writing the defendant company shall instead of four seats in the box permit 6 persons in the stall and 8 persons in the gallery or pit to view the performance held in the aforesaid two demised premises. The allegation is that the defendant company has committed breach of this covenant. That is the cause of action.
(2.) THE main dispute in this suit may be stated briefly at the outset. By a Statute of the West Bengal Government an Entertainment Tax has been imposed on all free or complimentary passes or tickets. This Statute is the West Bengal Amusement Tax (Amendment) Act, 1949, being West Bengal Act 11 of 1949. The defendant company contends that such Entertainment Tax has to be paid by the plaintiff and the defendant company and its Receivers who are the two other defendants in this suit demanded payment of this tax from the plain -tiff. On the other hand the plaintiff contends that she is not liable to pay the tax for the seats mentioned in the covenant, in the Indenture, of Lease. She claims protection from this liability under the covenants in the lease.
(3.) IT is admitted by the defendant company and the two Receiver defendants that the admittance of the Cinema was refused to the plaintiff and/or her nominees on this ground. The plaintiff gave notice of forfeiture and gave the defendants time to remedy such alleged breach. As the defendants did not yield on the point, the plaintiff has sued for possession.;