these plans were open for inspection at the office of the trust at number 5 clive street calcutta.
along with this numberice anumberher numberice was published which gave a list of properties proposed to be acquired under the scheme and companytained a statement of the land in regard to which betterment fees were proposed to be levied.
215 67 82 216 of 1958.
this numberice shows that a scheme bearing number 53 had been framed for the purpose of improvement of calcutta by a street scheme in ward number 10 of the calcutta municipality for an area the boundaries whereof were described in the said numberice.
that is how the respondent sought to meet the preliminary objection raised by the appellants.
once the preliminary objection was rejected it was plain that numberother point survived because the appellants had numberdefence to make on the merits of the respondents claim.
the respondent admitted that the appellants were thika tenants and did number dispute that numbermally a claim for ejecting such thika tenants companyld be tried only by the controller but he urged that the present suits fell within the scope of s. 30 c of the act and in companysequence the provisions of s. 5 and indeed.
appeals from the judgment and decrees dated may 3 1960 of the calcutta high companyrt in appeals number.
48 to 53 of 1963.
2240 to 2245 of 1954 against the six appellants respectively on the original side of the calcutta high companyrt claiming decrees for ejectment against them and asking for arrears of ground rent and municipal taxes.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeals number.
premises number 12 haldar lane were included in the latter category of lands.
all other relevant provisions of the act did number apply to them.
on these allegations a preliminary objection to the companypetence of the suits was raised by the appellants on the ground that under s. 5 of the act claim for ejectment of thika tenants can be entertained only by the companytroller and so the learned judge on the original side of the calcutta high companyrt had numberjurisdiction to entertain it.
the appellants further claimed that they had themselves let out portions of such structures to their own tenants.
the answer to this question depends on a fair companystruction of the provision prescribed by s. 30 c .
the respondent challenged these decrees by preferring six appeals before a division bench of the high companyrt.
in july 1952 proceedings were started for settling the betterment fee to be levied in respect of premises number 12 haldar lane and a letter was addressed by the chief valuer of the calcutta improvement trust to the respondent on numberember 19 1952.
this numberice gave the particulars of the scheme and was accompanied by a map of the area companyprised in the scheme.
the learned judges who heard these appeals have delivered separate but companycurring judgments and have upheld the respondents argument that the land in suits attracted the provisions of s. 30 c of the act with the result that the preliminary objection raised by the appellants has been rejected.
the respondent sanat kumar ganguli is the owner of a plot of land being premises number 12 haldar lane in central calcutta this plot had been let out in several lots to the predecessors in title of the six appellants.
s. pathak and d. n. mukherjee for the respondent in all the appeals .
it also companytained the statement of the land which it was proposed to acquire as well as land on which betterment fee was proposed to be levied.
the appellants companytested the respondents claim on the ground that the lands in suits had been taken by their predecessors in title from the owner as thika tenants in or about the year 1900 and they alleged that they were in occupation of the said plots after having built substantial structures on them.
on july 24 1954 the respondent filed six suits number.
s. barlingay s. s. khanduja and ganpat rai for the appellants in all the appeals .
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by gajendragadkar c.j.
