MANOHAR LAL SEAL Vs. BENGAL POTTERIES LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal by the plaintiff arises out of a suit for recovery of rent in respect of years 1353 to 1359 Ps. The defendants claimed abatement of rent on the ground that the lessor had failed to deliver possession of the entire demised land.

(2.) On consideration of the entire evidence, oral and documentary both the courts below concurrently held that neither the original lessor, nor his successor in interest, including the defendants were in possession of the entire land demised under the lease (Ext. 1). They held that the lessor himself was not in possession at the time when the lease was created. Their concluded opinion was that the defendants were not in possession of the entire land demised nor was the plaintiff ever in possession of those lands. According to them the defendants had not received possession of two third of the leasehold property. On these findings they allowed abatement of rent. The rent was accordingly apportioned and the suit decreed in part.

(3.) Mr. P. B. Ganguly appearing for the appellant contended that the defendants and their predecessors in interest acquiesced in the lease and having paid rent for over 30 years in respect of the entire property demised by virtue of the lease (Ext. 1), they were estopped from questioning the right of the plaintiff to claim the entire rent in respect of the entire property. The facts found by the courts below shortly stated are as follows.