SHEIKH AJIMALLA Vs. PANCHANAN RAY AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Rule arises out of a proceeding for assessment of compensation which forms a necessary sequel to a proceeding for ejectment under Sec. 9(l)(iii) of the West Bengal Non-Agricultural Tenancy Act. The compensation is payable under the proviso to the said Clause (iii) of Sec. 9(1).

(2.) In the present case, the decree for ejectment was admittedly passed on July 23, 1951. Thereafter, as the parties could not agree to the amount of reasonable compensation, payable by the landlord to the tenant, under the above statutory proviso there followed the usual or the necessary application to the court. The learned Munsif held that the tenant would be entitled, by way of compensation, to "the costs of making a new structure similar to the one which he has in the disputed land and for determining this compensation he directed the appointment of a Commissioner.

(3.) From this decision of the learned Munsif, there was an appeal taken by the landlord and the learned Subordinate Judge who heard the appeal has been pleased to hold that the tenant was entitled to compensation only to the extent of the costs of removal of the materials from the disputed land.