MANMATHA PAL CHOWDHURY Vs. SURENDRA NATH BOSE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the defendants in a suit for arrears of rent. We shall refer briefly to the antecedent history so as to make intelligible the points in controversy between the parties.

(2.) On the 22 August, 1913 the plaintiffs sued the defendants for rent of the disputed property for the years 1315 to 1318. That suit was decided by the Subordinate Judge, on the 27 of May 1916. The decree was modified on appeal by the District Judge on the 3rd December 1918. On second appeal to this Court the decree was further I modified on the 22nd July, 1921. In the meanwhile on the 21 August, 1914, the plaintiffs instituted another suit against the defendants for rent from the Chaitra instalment of 1318 to the Ashar instalment of 1321. That suit was decreed and the decree was apparently satisfied. Subsequently on the 14 April, 1919, the plaintiffs instituted the present suit for recover--of what is called excess rent in respect of the period covered by the second suit as also the rent which has "accrued due from 1322 to 1325." The Subordinate Judge decreed the claim on the 28 June 1920. That decree has been assailed before up substantially on three grounds, namely, first, that the rent in respect of the period not covered by the previous litigation should be decreed at the rate fixed by the High Court, in the first suit; secondly, that the claim in respect of the period covered by the second suit is not maintainable; and thirdly, that cesses have been decreed at a rate higher than that leviable.

(3.) As regards the first point, there is clearly no room for serious controversy. In the first suit the plaintiffs invited the Court to adjust the rent payable in respect of the lands in the occupation of the defendants. It was found that land had accreted to the original tenancy and that grounds existed for variation in the rate of rent. The ultimate result was that the rent was fixed at Ks. 917-13-0 by this Court in respect of all the lands in the occupation of the tenants. It is plain that for the period now in suit, that is, from 1322 to 1325 which is subsequent to the time of commencement of the adjusted rate as determined by the decree of this Court, the plaintiffs are entitled to a decree at that rate only. The decree will be varied accordingly.