SOMAR SINGH Vs. BANKE BEHARI LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a second appeal by defendants in a rent suit. The suit related to cash rents for the years 1344 to 1346 Fasli and produce rents for the years 1345 and 1346 Fasli, but the only question raised in this appeal is with regard to the produced rents for the year 1346, in regard to which a decree has been given to the landlords both for paddy and rabi crops.

(2.) With regard to the produce rents for this particular year, the appellants set up a defence that there had been proceedings under Secs.69 and 70, Bihar Tenancy Act, and consequently no suit for the rents of that year was maintainable in the civil Court. The Courts below, however held that they were entitled to ignore the proceedings under the Bihar Tenancy Act, because of inadequacy of notice to the landlords and because the reason given by the Deputy Collector for rejecting the landlord's objection under Section 70(4) was not a proper one.

(3.) The Courts below have not dealt with the matter correctly. The procedure under Secs.69 and 70 is briefly this. Under Section 69(1) the Collector appoints an officer to divide the produce. That officer under Section 70(2) then gives notice to the landlord and tenant of the time and place at which the division will be made, and if either the landlord or the tenant fails to attend either personally or by agent, he may proceed ex parte. Having made the division he submits a report of his proceedings to the Collector under Section 70(3). Thereupon under Section 70(4) the Collector is to consider the report, and after giving the parties an opportunity of being heard and making such inquiry, if any, as he may think necessary is to pass such orders as he thinks just. Finally, under Section 70(6) the Collector may, if he thinks proper, refer any question in dispute for the decision by a civil Court, but, subject to that, his order shall be final and shall on application to a civil Court by the landlord or the tenant be enforceable as a decree.