ASHUTOSH GANGOPADHYA Vs. SAROJINI SAHA CHAUDHURANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This rule has been issued upon the opposite party to show cause why a judgment and decree of the Small Cause Court should not be set aside in a suit by the plaintiff opposite party for contribution on account of rent paid by the plaintiff on account of arrears of rental of tenures alleged to be held by the opposite party in order to save them from sale.

(2.) The first ground on which the rule was issued is that, the plaintiff opposite party's raiyati holdings, having been in no danger of being avoided or in any way adversely affected by the default in paying up the revenue, the present suit should have been dismissed; and secondly that assuming that the plaintiff was entitled to recover, she was entitled to a decree, only against the Opposite Party 2, who is defendant 3, to whom, the petitioners allege, they had transferred the tenure which was saved from being sold by the payment made by the plaintiffs.

(3.) As regards the first point, contribution is claimed under Section 9, Act 11 of 1859, and the person depositing the arrears of revenue is entitled to recover the amount if it is deposited in good faith, believing that the interest of the person so depositing is in danger. In the circumstances of the present case, there is no reason to think that the deposit was not made in good faith thinking that the interest of] the plaintiff was endangered by the sale. So there is no substance in this ground.