HARI KINKAR SAMANTA Vs. DEB KUMAR CHOUDHURY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Rule is directed against a decision of the learned Subordinate Judge of Birbhum, sitting as a Small Cause Court Judge. The Rule arises out of a suit for recovery of Rs. 720.00 on a contract (Ext. t) dated 23, Sravan 1357 B. S. corresponding to Aug. 8, 1950. The suit was brought on the allegation that, under the contract, mentioned above, the defendant undertook to have the suit-land cultivated and fish reared in the suit-tanks as agent of and on behalf of the plaintiff and that he stipulated to pay half the produce of the land and half the fish, reared in the tanks to the plaintiff and to retain the other half as his remuneration. In the contract there was also a stipulation that in default of payment in the produce and the fish, the plaintiff would be entitled to a sum of Rs. 720.00 per annum from the defendant.

(2.) The defence which has succeeded before the learned Subordinate Judge is that the defendant was, under the contract, Ext. 1, pleaded by the plaintiff, a bargadar and that accordingly, the present suit was barred under the provisions of the West Bengal Bargadars Act, 1950. The learned Subordinate Judge has accepted this defence and has , dismissed the plaintiff's suit on this preliminary ground. The propriety of that decision is challenged in this Rule.

(3.) In my opinion, this Rule ought to succeed.