BIBHARANI DEVI Vs. RAMPADA PAUL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals arise out of two suits instituted in the lower court being Suit No. 42/90 of 948/1947 and Suit No. 43/91 of 1948/1947. Both these suits as also another suit instituted between the same parties being Suit No. 44/92 of 1948/1947 are covered by one judgment of the trial court and one judgment of the lower appellate court. The trial court found against the Plaintiffs. Against the said decision of the trial court, so far as it related to suit No. 44/92 of 1948/1947, there was no appeal and consequently the same remained binding on thee Plaintiffs. The Plaintiffs however preferred appeals against the decision of the trial court so far as it related to the other two suits namely, Suit No. 42/90 and Suit No. 43/91. The lower appellate court dismissed the said appeals and it is against that decision that the present appeals have been preferred to this Court.

(2.) The learned advocate for the Appellants in the first instance urged a ground which is common to both the appeals. The question raised by the learned advocate, shortly put, was whether or not a person holding from one of the proprietors was a raiyat within the definition of the word raiyat as given in the Bengal Tenancy Act. If he was a raiyat then he would come within the exceptions of Section 37 of the Bengal Land-Revenue Sales (West Bengal Amendment) Act, 1950 (West Bengal Act VII of 1950). The facts necessary to be set out in order to appreciate this point are as follows:

(3.) As already mentioned, there was no appeal against the decision of the trial court in Suit No. 44/92 but the appeal related to other suit. The lower appellate court dismissed the appeals in Suit Nos. 42 and 44 but allowed the appeal in Suit No. 43'91. On the question of assessment of fair reut the lower appellate court held that the rent in respect of Suit No. 42/90 and Suit No. 44/92 were fair but that different considerations arose with regard to Suit No. 43/91. He, however, gave liberty to the Plaintiffs to bring a suit for determination of the fair and equitable rent on the subject-matter of the said suit. The Plaintiffs have filed this appeal against the said decision of the lower appellate court.