RAJA RESHEE CASE LAW Vs. SATIS CHANDRA PAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE appeals have been brought to settle a question which has been frequently discussed before Indian tribunals and has resulted in conflicting decisions. So far as India is concerned the law was finally settled by a decision of the Full Bench of the High Court of Bengal, Purna Chandra Chatterjee v. Narendra Nath Chowdhury (1925) I.L.R. 52 C. 894. In the present case the judgment followed the decision of the Full Bench, and the object of the present appeals is in effect, to bring that decision under review.

(2.) AS the facts are not in controversy it is unnecessary to recapitulate the summary of these contained in the judgment appealed from. It is sufficient to say that the appellant who is the owner of a large area of ground, of which the first respondent (who alone appeared before the Board) holds a lease, and presented three applications in the Court of the Revenue Officer, one under Section 106 and two under Section 105 of the Bengal Tenancy Act, 1885. The latter were withdrawn without any express leave being granted to bring a fresh suit, while in the former such permission was granted. Thereafter, the present suits (two) were filed by the appellant in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Midnapore, dealing admittedly with the same subject matter as was contained in the previous applications in the Court of the Revenue Officer.

(3.) SECTION 109 is in these terms: