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

1953 Supreme(Cal) 75

K.C.CHUNDER
JAMINI KHAN – Appellant
Versus
DHIRENDRA NATH KUNDU – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
BANKIM CHANDRA ROY, PRAFULLA KAMAL DAS, SUDHANSU K.HAZRA

K. C. CHUNDER, J.

( 1 ) THIS Rule was issued at the instance of a tenant who has been ordered by the Munsif to deposit rent under Section 14 (4), West Bengal Premises Rent Control (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1950.

( 2 ) THE point urged before me is that in the written statement there was an allegation that there was no relationship of landlord and tenant. Therefore, no deposit should have been ordered. It appears that in a previous proceeding between the same parties the question whether there was a relationship of landlord and tenant between these two parties themselves was raised and was decided against the petitioner. That case was dismissed on another ground. Over and above this, when Section 14 (4) application came to be heard, the petitioner himself was examined. His deposition was that there was an adjustment of some dues over the value of betel purchased from him against the cost awarded in the previous suit and the rent due to the plaintiff. He himself, therefore, accepted that he was a tenant and that rent was due. He pleaded a story of adjustment which the Munsif rightly disbelieved, the reasons having been given in his judgment.

( 3 ) UNDER the circumstances, it is f


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