Calcutta High Court
Prohlad Patni vs Shashadhar Rai on 17 March, 1910
Equivalent citations: 7IND. CAS.553
JUDGMENT
1. Each case of this class must be determined according to its own peculiar circumstances, and I feel no doubt that what is claimed here is a sum payable under a contractual relationship and referable to that relationship, and it is in no sense rent that is claimed. It follows from this that the exclusion under art. 8 of the second Schedule to the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act has no application, and the Court had jurisdiction to try the suit.
2. The rule must, therefore, be discharged with costs-hearing fee, two gold mohurs.