PRASANNA KUMAR ADHIKARY Vs. RACHIMUDDIN HOWLADAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a suit for the recovery of arrears of rent, and, for present purposes, the facts may be thus briefly stated.

(2.) In February 1904, the defendant executed a kabulyat in favour of the plaintiff, agreeing to occupy 96 bighas of land at a rental of Rs. 220 per annum, and further stipulating that, should he be found at any time to be occupying more land than that specified, he would be liable to pay rent for the excess land at the same rate. The defendant now holds 117 bighas of land, and the suit was brought to recover from him rent for the years 1906 and 1907 at the rate of Rs. 268 par annum.

(3.) After the execution of the kabulyat, Settlement proceedings were undertaken, and fair and equitable rents were settled under Sections 104 to 104F of the Bengal Tenancy Act, 1885, as it now stands after amendment. A Record of Rights was finally published on the 5th April 1906, and, according to it, the defendant then held 117 bights of land, and the rent fixed for that area was Rs. 220. The lower Appellate Court has come to the conclusion that, in these circumstances, Section 113 of the Tenancy Act was a bar to the recovery by the plaintiff of anything beyond the rate of Rs. 220, and it rejected the plaintiff s claim for additional rent in respect of the alleged excess area.