Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

1. This is an appeal by the defendants the Commissioners of Basirhat Municipality against a judgment of affirmance. The plaintiff instituted a suit on the following allegations. There is a piece of land known as landing ghat near the post office of the town formerly used for coming over to river Ichhamati. This land was being settled temporarily by the municipality to different persons from time to time. The plaintiff took settlement of the land from 1953-54 at an annual rent of Rs. 30/- and on erection of shop room thereon had been carrying on business there. Municipal Commissioners put a notice on March 16, 1956 for settlement of the landing ghat for three years. At the auction held on March 23, 1956 the plaintiff took the land with the highest bid of Rs. 75/-as annual rent and deposited Rs. 45/- on that date. A kabuliat was to be executed within 15 days under the terms of auction. In spite of requests the Commissioners did not supply the plaintiff the particulars and the area of the land and on the contrary informed the plaintiff by a letter dated April 19, 1956 that if the kabuliat was not executed by April 27, 1956 the lease would be cancelled. Even thereafter no particulars were supplied and no written lease was executed or registered as required under the letter. In fact according to the letter of the Commissioners the lease was cancelled and rent was being collected from some other person called Haran. There was thus no lease and the plaintiff was never a lessee and nor bound to pay any rent and the lease if any was wholly void and illegal. The Commissioners being displeased with the plaintiff illegally issued and served a distress warrant on 7th March, 1958 by its employees and in pursuance thereof attached and seized his goods worth about Rs. 400/-in his absence. Criminal proceeding was started against the said employees but the plaintiff has referred to the Civil Court. The suit was accordingly filed on due notice under Section 535 of the Bengal Municipal Act, 1932 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) praying for a declaration of plaintiffs title to the movable properties seized and, that there was no valid lease by the Municipality to the plaintiff, that the plaintiff was not bound to pay any rent, and that the distress warrant was illegal void and inoperative. There was a prayer for injunction restraining the defendants the Commissioners of the Municipality from selling the seized goods by auction and if the goods were sold in the mean time, it was prayed that there should be a decree for Rs. 400/- as compensation for the goods seized and Rs. 45/- for refund of the deposit as stated above. The suit was instituted on September 6, 1958.