Meanwhile in 1956, some of the border areas of the Bihar State were transferred to the State of West Bengal as a result of the amendment of the Constitution.
against the aforementioned decree in High Court of Patna on September 7, 1956 and the same was admitted by the High Court on September 10, 1916.
Before the High Court the defendants Counsel pressed for decision only two points viz. ,
One of the areas that stood transferred to the State of West Bengal is that companycerned in the present litigation.
That appeal stood transferred to the High Court of Calcutta under the provisions of the Bihar and West Bengal Transfer of Territories Act, 1956, the Act under which the transfer of territories mentioned earlier took place.
Appeal from the Judgment and decree dated August 30, 1965 of the Calcutta High Court in Appeal from Appellate Decree No.
At the time of the institution of the suit, the suit property was within the limits of the State of Bihar.
According to the plaint case, the plaintiff leased out the property described in Sch.
That the plaintiffs claim is barred by equitable estoppel and 2 the suit is liable to be dismissed under s. 9 read with s. 80 of the West Bengal Non agricultural Tenancy Act, 1949 to be hereinafter referred to as the 1949 Act .
Part VIl of that Act provided that the law then in force in the transferred ,territories was to companytinue until otherwise provided by the ,competent legislature or other companypetent authority.
The defendant resisted the suit on various grounds.
The plain tiff was the owner of the suit property.
The defendant filed a ,second appeal.
In 1959 the West Bengal legislature enacted the West Bengal Transferred Territories Assimilation of Laws Act, 1958 to be hereinafter referred to as the 1958 Act .
That Act came into force on July 1, 1959.
As the defendant did number surrender possession of the property, the plaintiff instituted the suit from which this appeal M 1245 Sup CI/71 arises on January 3, 1940 in the companyrt of Muinsif at Purulia.
The learned trial judge rejected all those grounds and decreed the suit ill May, 1952, as prayed for and directed the defendant to deliver vacant possession of the suit plot after removing the structures put up by him.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTIONION Civil Appeal No.
In 1948 the plain tiff asked him to remove those structures but the defendant did number companyply with that demand, hence in September 1948, the plaintiff served on him a numberice to quit determining the tenancy With effect from the 1st November, 1948.
The second appeal filed by the ,defendant which had stood transferred to the Calcutta High ,Court came up for hearing before that companyrt on August 10, 1965.
N. Mukherjee and A. G. Ratnaparkhi, for respondent, No.
The transfer in question took place on November 1, 1956.
1033 of 1956.
The appellants are the legal representatives.
The decree of the trial companyrt was affirmed by the List appellate companyrt on July 11, 1952.
S. Desai, Krishna Sen and B. P Maheshwari, for the appellants.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Hegde,J. This appeal by certificate arises from the deci sion of the Calcutta High Court in its appellate decree No.
It was an oral lease.
But in the year 1947 without the plaintiffs knowledge the defendant companys tructed several structures on the land.
1973 of 1966.
original plaintiff Chiranji Lal Khaitan.
1033 of 1956.
III to the plaint a vacant plot to the defendant in June 1943 on a monthly rental of Rs.
of the.
The defendant took on lease that property for the purpose of carrying on his motor business.
