MOYDHANNESSA BIBI Vs. SATIS CHANDRA GIRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the plaintiffs in a suit for a declaration that a solenama entered into between the second plaintiff and the defendant, and the decree for rent based thereon, were fraudulent and illegal. The defendant claimed rent at the rate of Rs. 40-13 which was entered in a petition of compromise and which was filed before the Revenue Officer on the 1 March 1910. The plaintiffs contended that the rent was payable at the rate of Rs. 28 which is entered as the fair and equitable rent in the finally published Record of Rights. The Court of first instance decided in favour of the plaintiffs. The lower Appellate Court reversed that decision. On second appeal to this Court the case wag remanded for further consideration. After remand, the Subordinate Judge has adhered to his previous decision. We have consequently to consider whether the rent is payable at the rate of Rs. 40-13, as claimed by the defendant, or at the rate of Rs. 28, as claimed by the plaintiff.

(2.) The case for the defendant is, that this compromise cannot be impeached, as it was considered by a Revenue Officer especially empowered under Section 109C, Bengal Tenancy Act, who was satisfied that the rent agreed upon was fair and equitable. If the defendant is able to establish this allegation, he is entitled to succeed. But this raises a question of, the true scope and import of Secs.109B and 109C of the Bengal Tenancy Act.

(3.) It is well-known that before these sections were enacted, it had been ruled in: Sheo Sahoy V/s. Ram Rashia Roy 18 C. 333 : 9 Ind. Dec. (N.S.) 223 and Nath Singh V/s. Damri Singh 28 C. 90; which were applied in Kedar Nath Hazra V/s. Manindra Chandra Nandi 5 Ind. Cas. 301 : 11 C.L.J. 106 and Bala Mandal V/s. Manindra Chandra Nandi 25 Ind. Ind. Cas. 829 : 21 C.L.J. 325 : 16 C.W.N. 321 that an agreement for variation of rent might be held valid, even though it was in contravention of the provisions of Section 29, Bengal Tenancy Act, if it was established that such agreement was for the purpose of settlement of some bona fide dispute. This allowed the landlord to evade the provisions of Section 29, Bengal Tenancy Act. The result was that Secs.109B and 109C were introduced into the Bengal Tenancy Act.