RAM RATAN KARMAKAR Vs. AMULYA CHARAN KARMAKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Rule is directed against an order dated 27th March 1951, passed by the Additional District Judge of 24 Parganas under Section 40A of the Bengal Agricultural Debtors' Act. The applicants before me are the debtors.

(2.) The only question for consideration is whether the transaction between the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners and the predecessor-in-interest of the opposite parties was a mortgage or a lease. It appears that on the 11th March 1921, one Ram Krishna, the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners took a sum of Rs. 120/- from Amulya Charan, the predecessor-in-interest of the opposite parties. The only question involved in this Rule is the character of this money.

(3.) It appears that in connection with that payment a patta was executed in favour of Amulya Charan in respect of a share of a tank, whereas an ekrarnama was executed in favour of Ram Krishna. The patta purports in the clearest possible manner to be a document of lease whereas the ekrarnama stipulates that if the amount paid as premium be repaid by Chaitra, 1343 B.S. Amulya Krishna or his suc-cessor-in-interest would be bound to return the property. In an application made on 8th April 1945 by the present petitioner for the settlement of the so-called debt constituted by the aforesaid sum of Rs. 120/- the Special Officer held that there was, in fact, a debt and that it had been satisfied by the usufruct of the property enjoyed by the creditors for upwards of 15 years. On appeal, however, the appellate officer held that there was no loan at all and no debt and that decision has been affirmed by the learned Additional District Judge.