JUGAL KISHORE BIRLA Vs. BISHNU HARI JANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants of these 22 appeals brought a group of 29 rent suits in the 3rd Court of the Munsif of Midnapore for recovery of arrears of rent from the tenants respondents. The rent lands are situate in different mouzahs of Pergunna Kutubpore within the district of Midnapore and the period of claim varies between 2 and 4 years within the limits of the years 1350 B. Section to 1353 B. S.

(2.) The defendants contested the suit raising various pleas, but the plea which was common to all the suits and which is material for the purpose of these appeals was that by virtue of an immemorial Custom prevailing in Pergunnah Kutubpore the tenants were entitled to proportionate remission of rent on account of 'haja' and 'suka', that is, inundation & drought. The tenants pleaded that there was a total failure of crops in 1352 B. S. on account of 'suka' or drought and also a complete failure of crops in 1353 B. S. on account of 'haja' or inundation and so the tenants were entitled to get wholesale remission of rent for these years. The custom as also its validity was denied on behalf of the plaintiffs and the learned Munsif who heard the suits analogously decreed the suits in part by one judgment allowing this plea in 24 suits and holding that the existence of a valid custom had been established in respect of 'jal' lands in Pergunnah Kutubpore. He further held that there was a total failure of crops in all the mouzahs in 1352 B. S. on account of 'suka' and also a total failure in 1353 B. S. in some of the mouzahs on account of 'haja' and partial failure in others. Accordingly the learned Munsif allowed remission of rent in respect of jal lands for these two years, the remission being complete or partial according to the extent of the damage found by the Munsif. In 5 suits the plea was negatived because the Munsif found that the plea was not available to the defendants of those suits on account of the bar of 'res judicata'.

(3.) The plaintiffs landlord preferred appeals from the decrees passed in all these suits. The learned Subordinate Judge affirmed the judgment and decrees passed in the above 24 suits with the exception of .2 suits in which the lower appellate Court made a finding that the plea of 'haja' and 'suka' was not open to the defendants of those suits on account of the bar of 'res judicata'. The laud-lords have filed these 22 appeals from the judgment and decrees of the lower appellate Court leaving out the 7 suits in which the plea was negatived by the trial Court and the lower appellate Court.