RAJENDRA NATH MANNA Vs. JOGJIBAN HANSDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only question in this case is whether a lease under which a rent was payable annually is a lease for valuable consideration. The point arises under Section 37A(1)(c)(iii), Bengal Agricultural Debtors (Amendment) Act of 1942.

(2.) It is common ground that there was a lease in this case and the Courts have held that it was a bona fide one. Learned advocate for the opposite party has attempted to challenge that finding, but it appears to me that at this stage in revision I cannot possibly go into a question which is purely one of fact.

(3.) Learned advocate for the opposite party also urged that the view of the Courts below that a lease where no selami was paid is a lease without valuable consideration is the correct one. According to the Courts below, the rent payable every year could not be regarded as consideration for the lease.