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

1922 Supreme(Cal) 382

PANTON, CUMING
Raja Resheecase Law – Appellant
Versus
Chintamoni Dalai – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Cuming, J. - This appeal arises out of an application u/s 105,Bengal Tenancy Act, to settle fair rents of a number of holdings and relates to two of the holdings viz., Nos. 16 and 53. The landlord asked for an enhancement of the rent of these holdings under Sections 30(b), Bengal Tenancy-Act. With regard to both these holdings the lower Courts have held that as No. 16 is a homestead and No. 53 is a homestead and tank, they are not liable to enhancement u/s 30(6), Bengal Tenancy Act. The landlord has appealed. The tenant unfortunately, as the question is apparently one of first impression and also of some importance, has not appeared. The decision of the question would seem to depend on the wording of Section 30 and Section 182.

2. Reading Section 30 there seems nothing in the section to restrict it to the land actually used for cultivation. To attract the operation of the section it would seem to be sufficient that the land in question is a holding, held at a money rent by an occupancy raiyat. The land in question is clearly a holding Section 3(9).

3. Neither would Section 182 remove homestead lands from the operations of Section 30.

4. Section 182 provides that when a raiyat

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