NAGENDRA NATH GHOSAL Vs. BARADA KANTA NANDAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question raised in this case is whether in making an order under section 6 of the Thika Tenancy Act for payment of the amount of rent in arrears, the Thika Controller can include in the amount ordered to be paid such portion of the unpaid rent in respect of which a decree has already been obtained by the landlord.

(2.) THE petitioner was a thika tenant within the meaning of the Thika Tenancy Act, paying originally rent at the rate of Rs. 75/- per month, and thereafter, on the basis of a consent decree at Rs. 90/- per month. On 24th February, 1954, the landlord, who is the opposite party in this Court, brought a suit for realisation of arrears of rent; and on the 23rd June, 1954, made an application for ejectment of the petitioner under section 5 of the Thika Tenancy Act, on the ground of default. On 29th September, 1955, the landlord obtained a decree for Rs. 2,588-8-9 of which Rs. 2,205-0-0 was on account of arrears of rent. On 19th November, 1955, the Thika Controller made an order in the following terms on the landlord's application for ejectment:

(3.) THOUGH the Controller does not clearly indicate how this figure of Rs. 2,385/- was arrived at, it is sufficiently clear that he was of opinion that rent was in arrears for 27 months, from December, 1951 to January, 1954, at the rate of Rs. 90/- except for Rs. 45/-which had been paid. It may be mentioned that a "contention was raised both before the Thika Controller and the Court of Appeal below that legally rent was payable only at Rs. 75/- and the consent decree was void. This was rejected. It was raised before me also though rather half-heartedly. I can see nothing that would justify the view that the consent decree was void, and I hold that the Thika Controller and the Appellate Court rightly proceeded on the basis that rent was payable at Rs. 90/- per month.