RAJLAKSHI DASSI Vs. CORPORATION OF CALCUTTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts involved in these appeals shortly stated are as follows: The properties described in the schedules to the plaints in the suits out of which these appeals have arisen belonged to one Raj Ballav Sil. They are all situate within the jurisdiction of the Corporation of Calcutta. Raj Ballav died and his son Jogendra inherited the properties. Jogendra died leaving him surviving his widow Katyani and a daughter named Rajlakshi Dasi. After Jogendra's death the widow Katyani succeeded her husband and was in possession of the properties. She made default in paying the municipal rates and taxes due in respect of the said properties. The Corporation of Calcutta thereupon instituted the present suits for recovery of the arrears of races and taxes. Katyani died after the institution of the suits. Her daughter Rajlakshi has been substituted in her place on the record.

(2.) She contends that she is now in possession of the premises as reversioner to the estate of her father and not as heiress of her mother, that she is not responsible for the arrears duo from her mother who had only a life interest in these properties, and further that the said arrears cannot have operation as first charges upon the properties in her hands. The Court of first . instance decreed the suits but disallowed certain notice or warrant fees. Rajlakshi carried appeals to the Additional District Judge, 24 Pargannas, but the latter by his judgment and decree dated 21 December 1928 dismissed her appeals. Thereupon the present appeals have been brought.

(3.) On behalf of the appellant, Mr. Rupendra Kumar Mitter has presented an ingenious argument. He argues that although the consolidated rate due from any person in respect of any land or building is, (subject to the prior payment of the land revenue, if any, due to the Government thereon) a first charge upon the said land or building by virtue of Section 205, Calcutta Municipal Act (Bengal Act 3 of 1923), still, in the events which have happened, the appellant Rajlakshi is now in possession of the said properties not as heiress of her mother but as the heiress of her father and therefore the same are free of the charge referred to in Section 205 of the Act in respect of the arrears of rates and taxes which had accrued due during the time her mother was in possession of the properties and in support of this contention he has drawn our attention to certain cases under Section 65, Ben, Ten. Act.