Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Profullah Chunder Bose and ors. Vs. SamiruddIn Mondul

Profullah Chunder Bose and ors. vs SamiruddIn Mondul

Type Court Judgment Court Kolkata Decided Dec 19, 1894
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/855780

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kolkata
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Tenancy

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Bengal Tenancy Act (VIII of 1885, Sections 15, 16) - Operation of those sections in a suit for rent of land, to which the plaintiff succeeded before the Bengal Tenancy Act came into force. -

Key legal issue
Tenancy

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Profullah Chunder Bose and ors.

Respondent

SamiruddIn Mondul

Legal References

Reported In
(1895)ILR22Cal337

Excerpt

bengal tenancy act (viii of 1885, sections 15, 16) - operation of those sections in a suit for rent of land, to which the plaintiff succeeded before the bengal tenancy act came into force. - o'kinealy and trevelyan, jj.1. this is an appeal from the decision of the district judge of the 24-parganas, dated the 5th of december 1893, reversing a decision of the second munsif of that district, dated the 11th of march 1893.2. the plaintiff in this case sued for rent, and at the hearing it appeared that the succession had opened out to him long before the tenancy act came into operation. the question is whether sections 15 and 16 of the tenancy act apply to this case, so as to affect him. section 16 certainly takes away a substantial right; and if we interpreted sections 13 and 14 in the same manner as the judge in the court below has interpreted sections 15 and 16, we should arrive at a most unreasonable conclusion. we think the sections have not retrospective effect.3. the order of the lower court is set aside, and the case remanded to the district judge in order that he may try it on the merits.4. the respondent will be entitled to the costs of this appeal.

Full Judgment

O'Kinealy and Trevelyan, JJ.

1. This is an appeal from the decision of the District Judge of the 24-Parganas, dated the 5th of December 1893, reversing a decision of the second Munsif of that District, dated the 11th of March 1893.

2. The plaintiff in this case sued for rent, and at the hearing it appeared that the succession had opened out to him long before the Tenancy Act came into operation. The question is whether Sections 15 and 16 of the Tenancy Act apply to this case, so as to affect him. Section 16 certainly takes away a substantial right; and if we interpreted Sections 13 and 14 in the same manner as the Judge in the Court below has interpreted Sections 15 and 16, we should arrive at a most unreasonable conclusion. We think the sections have not retrospective effect.

3. The order of the lower Court is set aside, and the case remanded to the District Judge in order that he may try it on the merits.

4. The respondent will be entitled to the costs of this appeal.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial