GOBORDHONE DAS DEORA Vs. DOOLICHAND SETHIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Rule in this case was obtained by one Gobordhone Das Deora, who alleged in his petition that he is the son of Hari Bux Daora, the proprietor of the firm of Hari Bux Gobordhan Das.

(2.) The proceedings, in respect of which the Rule was granted, were begun by a complaint by several tenants of certain premises, No. 46, Strand Road, calcutta, against their (landlord or landlords Hari Bux-Gobordhan) Das under Section 20 of the calcutta Rent Act, 1920, on the ground that the landlords I had wilfully discontinued the supply of unfiltered water to the urinals and privies in the premises by disconnecting the inlet and outlet pipes of the reserve tanks and by removing a force pump which was attached to the vertical inlet pipe and had thereby disturbed the easements annexed to the premises.

(3.) The Rant Controller accorded "sanction to the prosecution of the defendant landlord Hari Bax Gobordhan under Section 20 of the calcutta Rent Act."