HEM CHANDRA ROY CHOUDHURY Vs. BENAYAKDAS ACHARJI CHOUDHURY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals arise out of applications by the respondent under Section 105, Bengal Tenancy Act, for the settlement of a fair and equitable rent in respect of tenures held by the appellants. These tenures have been noted in the Record-of-Rights as permanent tenures with rent fixed in perpetuity. The object of the applications is to establish that the entry in the Record-of-Rights is incorrect and that the rents of the tenures are actually enhancible. The Assistant Settlement Officer tried the suits and held that on the evidence adduced by the plaintiffs they failed to rebut the presumption in favour of the correctness of the Record-of- Rights and. dismissed the suits. The learned Special Judge, on appeal by the plaintiffs reversed that decision and holding that the rents of the tenures are enhancible remanded the cases to the first Court for determination of other issues.

(2.) The tenant defendants have appealed and it is urged on their behalf that the Special Judge has erred in admitting in evidence or at any rate in attaching undue weight to some documents on which he has relied to find for the respondents.

(3.) It is admitted that the appellants have been paying rents at a uniform rate for long over 20 years giving rise to a presumption under Section 50 (2), Bengal Tenancy Act, that the tenures existed from the time of the Permanent Settlement. In order to rebut the presumption the respondent produced three documents :-(1) Quinquennial Register of 1795 (1202); (2) Haquiyat or Taidad papers of 1207 and 1212; and (3) Sarhadbandi papers of 1228. Of these the Quinquennial Register is the most important and has been held by the Judge to be sufficient to rebut the presumption under Section 50, Bengal Tenancy Act.