Phani Bhusan Roy Vs Lakshmi Moni Debi

Calcutta High Court 29 Apr 1970 L.P.A. No. 3 of 1961 in S.A. No. 711 of 1956 (1973) 2 ILR (Cal) 324
Bench: Division Bench
Result Published

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

L.P.A. No. 3 of 1961 in S.A. No. 711 of 1956

Hon'ble Bench

P.N. Mookerjee, J; Amiya K. Mookerji, J

Advocates

Hirendra Chandra Ghose and Ajoy Kumar Basu, Jr, for the Appellant;Sudhansu Sekhar Basu, for Purnendu Sekhar Basu, for the Respondent

Final Decision

Dismissed

Judgement Text

Translate:

P.N. Mookerjee, J.@mdashThis appeal is under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent. It is directed against a decision of our learned brother Chatterjee

J., as he then was and it arises out of a suit for eviction against a non-agricultural tenant.

2. The suit succeeded in the first two Courts, but in second appeal our learned brother Chatterjee J. dismissed the Plaintiff''s suit on the ground that

either the relevant notice of ejectment was insufficient or the suit was premature.

3. In our view, the decision of Chatterjee J. is right and has to be affirmed.

4. It is clear, on the Plaintiff''s own case that the disputed tenancy commended from the month of Magh 1349 B.S. The notice that was given was a

notice given in Bhadra 1357 B.S. asking the tenancy to vacate ""either with the expiry of the end of the month of Chaitra 1357 B.S., or, at the end

of the year of tenancy, which will expire next after the end of one half year from the date of the service of this notice."" The notice, therefore, was to

terminate either with the end of Chaitra 1357 B.S. or with the end of Pans 1358 B.S. the commencement of the tenancy having been the month of

Magh of a Bengali calendar year according to either parties'' case. If the former be taken to be the date of expiry, the notice would obviously be

insufficient as it would not be expiring with the end of a year of the tenancy. If the latter date of expiry of the notice be taken, the instant suit would

be premature, as it was instituted sometime in Sravan 1358 B.S. In this view, Chatterjee J. must be held to have rightly dismissed the Plaintiff''s

suit.

5. The above view would, obviously be supported by the Special Bench decision of this Court in the The Indian Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. Vs. Baker

Ali, , which view has since been affirmed by the Supreme Court in Indian Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. Vs. Biswanath Sonar, .

6. The first two Courts relied on Section 43 of the West Bengal Non-Agricultural Tenancy Act for the purpose of holding that, as under that

section the rent was payable according to Bengali, calendar months, the year of the tenancy would be according to Bengali calendar. This view

would be opposed to the above two authorities and we are unable to accept it. In our view, Section 43 has no relevance so far as the month of the

year of the tenancy is concerned although the mode or manner of payment of rent which it presents and regulates may be one of the matters for

consideration for determination of the said question. It is, however, well-settled that the mode or manner of payment would not be the sole

determinant in the above matter : vide Baidyanath Bhattacharjee Vs. Nirmala Bala Devi, .

7. In the above view, we dismiss this appeal.

8. There will be no order for costs in this appeal.

Amiya K. Mookerji J.

9. I agree.

From The Blog
Supreme Court Halts GST Assessment on Joint Development Deals
Oct
28
2025

Story

Supreme Court Halts GST Assessment on Joint Development Deals
Read More
Supreme Court Explains Demurrer Law in Neelkanth Realty Case
Oct
28
2025

Story

Supreme Court Explains Demurrer Law in Neelkanth Realty Case
Read More