ABDUL KARIM CHOWDHURY Vs. PROSANNA KUMAR NATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only point press-ed in this; appeal as before the lower appellate Court relates to the amounts of yearly rent, which the plaintiff-appellant is entitled to realize. The plaintiff claimed rent all the rate of Rs. 2-10-6 in addition to cesses and obtained a decree based on this rate in the first Court. On appeal the annual amount of rent payable was held to be Rs. 2-4-6, the learned Subordinate Judge having disallowed two items: for vet, cocoanut, 1 anna 6 pies, and for begar 4 annas 6 pies, as irreoverable abwabs.

(2.) Before dealing with this question it is necessary to refer to a preliminary point, which arose in connexion with the hearing of the appeal. The decision of this appeal depends on the construction of the lease, Ex. 1, by which, the tenancy was created. Under the rules of this Court contained in Note 1 of Rule 50 of Ch. IX of the Appellate Side Rules of this Court, it was the duty of the vakil for the appellant before the hearing of the appeal to serve on the vakil for the respondent a typed copy of the translation of this Exhibit and also to provide two such typed copies for the use of the Division Court, and this was not done; and as provided in that rule, I refuse to allow the learned vakil for the appellant to refer to this document at the hearing. He contended that this rule did not apply in the case of the present appeal which is an appeal from an appellate decree not exceeding Rs. 50 in value. In my opinion this Note and also Rule 50 apply to all appeals from appellate decrees, Rule 52 does not make any alteration as to the contents of the paper-book to which Rule 50 relates. It only modifies the previous Rule 51 which requires printed copies of the paper-book to be prepared by the Registrar at the cost of the appellant. In the case of appeals referred to in Rule 52 no printed paper-book is prepared, but instead of that typed copies of the paper-book are prepared without any charge being levied from the parties, but the contents of the paper-book remain the same in both classes of appeals.

(3.) As the decision of this appeal depends entirely on the construction of the lease the appellant has been put to some difficulty. It is for him to show that the decision of the appellate Court is wrong and it is difficult for him to do so without referring to the document, which the Courts have to interpret. However, from the judgment of the lower appellate Court there is sufficient description of the contents of the document to enable the argument to be adduced that the construction by that Court is wrong and the argument has been considerably strengthened by the admission, that was very fairly made by the learned vakil for the respondent that in this document there is a provision for payment of the rent by instalments and these instalments amount to the total sum claimed by the plaintiff-appellant as payable.