Tamizuddin Khan And Ors. vs Khoda Nawaz Khan And Ors. on 19 November, 1909
The cases of Tamizuddi v. Khoda Newaz 5 Ind. Cas.
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.23 seconds)Bengal Tenancy Act, 1885
Jogendra Nath Sircar And Ors. vs Tincowri Bhattacharjya on 21 June, 1909
In support of this proposition, reference may be made to the leading case of Kabil Sardar v. Chunder Nath Nag Chowdhury 20 C. 590, as also to the decisions in Chandra Mohun v. Biresswar 1 C.W.N. 158; Durga Prosad v. Doula Ghazee 1 C.W.N. 160; Gozaffur v. Dablish 1 C.W.N. 162 and Jogendra Nath v. Tincowri 10 C.L.J. 147 : 3 Ind. Cas.
Ananda Mohan Roy Chowdhury vs Guru Dayal Saha And Ors. on 4 July, 1910
116 : 11 C.L.J. 16 : 14 C.W.N. 229 and Ananda Mohan Roy Chowdhury v. Guru Dayal Saha 7 Ind. Cas. 19. It has been broadly contended that as the third defendant was the registered tenant, it was open to him to surrender a part of the holding in favour of the landlord and thus prejudice the title and possession of the first two defendants. In our opinion, this contention cannot prevail. The learned Judge has found that this surrender was collusive. As we understand his decision, his finding is that this surrender was made by the third defendant with the express object of destroying the right of the first two defendants. Now, it cannot be disputed that the effect of the purchase of a part of the holding by the first two defendants was not to operate as forfeiture of the tenancy.
1