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

1936 Supreme(Cal) 462

R. C. MITTER
Maharaja Sashi Kanta Acharjya Bahadur – Appellant
Versus
Nasirabad Loan Office Co. Ltd. – Respondent


ORDER

R.C. Mitter, J. - This Rule has been obtained by the landlord whose suit to recover the balance of the transfer fee due to him under the provisions of Section 26-E, Ben. Ten. Act, has been dismissed by the learned Munsiff at Mymensingh on the ground that no suit lay. The position is this: Opposite party No. 1, The Nasirabad Loan Office, Co., Ltd., obtained a mortgage decree against opposite parties Nos. 2 and 3. In execution of that decree the mortgaged property was sold, but the mortgage decree not being fully satisfied, opposite party No. 1 obtained a decree for the balance under the provisions of Order 34, Rule 6, Civil P. C. In execution of this decree they put up the holding which is the subject matter of controversy, to sale. In the sale proclamation the holding was described as an ordinary occupancy holding. At the sale held by the Court opposite party No. 1 purchased the holding for Rs. 325 and deposited a sum of Rs. 65 in the executing Court, the sum being 20 per cent. of the purchase price. The sale was confirmed. The rent of this holding is Rs. 57-13-9 and therefore under the provisions of Section 26-E the landlord is entitled to either five times the annual rent or

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