B BAJRANJ NARAIN Vs. RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a plaintiff's second appeal arising out of a suit for recovery of arrears of rent under Section 148 of the U. P. Tenancy Act. He had sued for the recovery of arrears of rent for the year 1357 Fasli. His case was that the rent agreed between the parties was Rs. 1000/- per year, and that the amount of Rs. 997/4/10 as detailed in the body of the plaint was due from the defendant. The plaintiff accordingly prayed for a decree in respect of the same. The suit was resisted by the defendant mainly on the ground that he had deposited ten times the annul rental under U. P. Agricultural Tenants (Acquisition of Privileges) Act, 1949 (U. P. Act X of 1949), and the rent fixed on the said land under this Act as payable by him was only Rs. 73/8/5. The trial Court accepted the defendants' contention, and decreed the suit for an amount of Rs. 36/11/11 with proportionate costs and with past, pendente lite and future interest at the legal and sanctioned rates.

(2.) The plaintiff went up in appeal. The case was heard by the learned Civil Judge, Farrukhabad, who dismissed the appeal with costs.

(3.) Dissatisfied with the decree passed by the lower appellate court, the plaintiff filed this second appeal in the High Court. When the case came up for hearing before a learned single Judge of this Court, the appellant's counsel questioned the correctness of the judgment of the lower appellate court on the ground that the provisions of U. P. Agricultural Tenants (Acquisition of Privileges) Act. 1949 (U. P. Act X of 1949) hereinafter called "the Act" in so far as they affected the agreed contractual rent between the landlord and the tenant were ultra vires of the U. P. Legislature. In the view of the fact that the argument of the learned counsel raised an important question of law, the learned single Judge referred the matter to a Bench. The case accordingly came up for hearing before us.