SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1920 Supreme(SC) 76

LORD DUNEDIN, LORD MOULTON, AMEER ALI
MIDNAPUR ZAMINDARI COMPANY LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
NARESH NARAYAN ROY – Respondent


Advocates:
Solicitors for appellants :Burton, Yeates, & Hart. Solicitors for respondent: W. W. Box & Co.

Judgement

LORD DUNEDIN. This is an appeal from the judgment of the High Court at Calcutta affirming a judgment of the Subordinate Judge by which he decreed khas possession of certain reformed and accreted chur lands in favour of the plaintiff. The plaintiff is a zamindar and the lands in question are admittedly within his zamindari. The existent lease of the lands having, as he contended, expired, he gave the necessary notice to terminate the tenancy. The appellants plead that they are occupancy tenants and as such entitled to maintain possession under the terms of Act X. of 1859 (the Bengal Rent Act).

The appellants are the successors by transfer to the firm of Jardine, Skinner & Co., who were prior to 1864 in occupancy of the lands, the zamindar at that time being the respondents father, to whom he has succeeded. In that year the respondents father raised an action against Jardine, Skinner & Co., claiming the lands in question. That suit was compromised. At the same time Jardine, Skinner & Co. took a lease of the whole taluk within which the lands were situated. Patta and kabuliyat were executed.

The kabuliyat executed by the manager of Jardine, Skinner & Co. bears as follows "I







Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top