MAHADEV PROSAD KHEMKA Vs. HANUMAN SEBA TRUST

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This case has been the occasion for some strange orders in the Court below and an extremely interesting argument before us.

(2.) On 23-6-1945, the opposite party, Hanuman Seba Trust brought a suit against one Rameswar Khemka for his ejectment from a piece of non-agricultural land and for damages. The latter relief was asked for on the footing that Rameswar had been occupying the land as a non-agricultural tenant for a limited period, but in spite of the period having expired he had been continuing in possession.

(3.) At the time the suit was brought, the Bengal Non-agricultural Tenancy (Temporary Provisions) Act, 9 of 1940 was in force and by reason of the provisions of Section 3 of that Act, every suit for ejectment of a non-agricultural tenant, other than such suits brought on account of non-payment of rent, was liable to be stayed during the period that the Act might continue to be in force. Because of that provision, the learned Munsif decided that the ejectment part of the suit before him had to be stayed, but the damages part could be dealt with. It is not easy to see how the learned Munsif could have come to that decision, because it is not easy to see what the liability for damages would be until the question of ejectment had been gone into and it had been decided that the defendant had been overstaying the period of his lease and was a trespasser. However, those considerations did not prevent the learned Munsif from proceeding with the claim for damages and ultimately he passed a decree on 4-6-1946. He dealt with both the ejectment part and the damages part of the suit by a single order and with regard to the ejectment part the order was that the suit "be stayed'.