BAMACHARAN DHAR Vs. SABITA RANI BASU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Rule was obtained against an order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Murshidabad, allowing the opposite party Plaintiff to prove that the disputed transaction, which was evidenced by a deed of sale and an agreement for reconveyance, was in substance a loan as contemplated in the Bengal Money Lenders Act for the purpose of enabling her to file and prosecute the present suit under Sec. 36 of the said Act.

(2.) The learned Subordinate. Judge has taken the view, overruling the Petitioner's objection on the point, that even though there are two documents, a deed of sale and an agreement for reconveyance, the Plaintiff would be entitled to prove the nature of the transaction and to show that it was in substance a loan for the purposes of the above Bengal Money Lenders Act in spite of Sec. 58C of the Transfer of Property Act. His view on the point was supported by him by, inter alia, a reference to the decision of this Court in Manindra Nath Bose v/s. Narendra Krishna Mitra, I.L.R. (1956) Cal. 59 and he distinguished the Supreme Court cases cited before him under Sec. 58C of the Transfer of Property Act.

(3.) The above matter in issue appears to have been considered more elaborately by this Court in the light of the said Supreme Court decisions and the earlier decision of this Court referred to in the preceding paragraph, in its recent decision in Banku Behari Chandra v/s. Sm. Kalyani Devi : 70 C.W.N. 139, and this latter decision plainly supports the view -point of the learned Subordinate Judge.