BADRINARAIN KANU Vs. MAISAN MANIPURINI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment will cover the two appeals NOS. 1615 and 1664 of 1945.

(2.) This appeal arises out of two rent suits instituted by Maisan Manipurini, plaintiff, against two separate sets of defendants. The holdings in the two suits belonged to her deceased husband. He got them under a gift from his maternal grandfather. The defendants in the two cases were settled by him in the year 1936. The annual rent fixed in each case was Rs. 20. The rent for year 1347-1349 B. S. was paid by the tenants. Plaintiff, as heir of her deceased husband, instituted the suits for recovery of rent. She also claimed compensation at the rate of 25 per cent. The amount claimed in each case is RS. 75.

(3.) The defendants resisted the suit on several grounds but it is not necessary to state them. The trial Judge found that the amount claimed was due to the plaintiff. The holdings in the suit were let out for residential purposes and were in fact being used as shops. They are situate in the heart of the Kalacherra bazar, and are not agricultural holdings. The contention of the defendants that plaintiff is not entitled to recover more than five times the land revenue for the holdings was negatived on this finding. The plea of the defendants that Sec. 59 (1) Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886, was a bar to the passing of any decree in favour of the plaintiffs succeeded only partially. The learned Munsiff hold that a conditional decree could be passed, which plaintiff will not be entitled to execute unless she got her name registered as a landholder under Ch. IV of the Regulation.