The decree holder put the decree in execution and recovered possession of the land on December 18, 1949.
Abdul Gaffur preferred a Second Appeal to the High Court and this was heard and disposed of by a single Judge of that companyrt on July 21, 1954, long after the Thika Tenancy Ordinance of 1952 and the Amending Act of 1953 had companye into force.
In the numberice to quit served on the 7th May, 1948 the first two persons were described as tenants under the plaintiff and the third as a person who had purported to purchase the structures on the land and the tenancy right therein.
On March 14, 1953 the Calcutta Thika Tenancy Amendment Act , 1953 was passed amending the definition of thika tenant still further and introducing important changes in the Act of 1949.
Appeal from the judgment and decree dated January 5, 1961 of the Calcutta High Court in Appeal from Appellate Decree No.
The Subordinate Judge dismissed the plea on the ground that the defendant appellant had number erected the structures on the land and was number a successor in interest of the tenant but only a transferee.
of this appeal are as follows.
Fifth Additional Court, Alipore on November 23, 1949.
Before the Subordinate Judge, a point was taken that after the companying into force of the Act of 1949, the Rent Controller alone had jurisdiction in respect of ejectment suits as the defendant appellant was a thika tenant.
1 was entitled.
In the result, they dismissed the appeal.
The suit was companytested only by the third defendant who filed a written statement in September 1948 companytending that the suit was bad for number joinder of parties.
No claim was made for rents or taxes although it was alleged that the same were in arrears.
K. Sen and D. N. Mukherjee, for the appellant.
The Calcutta Thika Tenancy Amendment Ordinance , 1952 was passed on October 21, 1952 introducing various changes in the Act and substituting a new definition of a thika tenant.
Sukumar Ghose, for respondent No.
The landlord went up in appeal once more to the High Court.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The effect of these provisions will be companysidered later on.
Mitter, J. This is an appeal by a certificate granted by the High Court at Calcutta from a judgment and decree in Second Appeal passed by that companyrt in January, 1961.
292 of 1948 for ejectment of three Persons, namely, Abdul Rahim, Abdul Hamid and Abdul Gaffur, from the property in suit a parcel of land about 1 companytah 8 chittaks being part of premises No.
The question before us is, whether the respondent No.
In the plaint itself, the first two defendants were described as thika tenants.
787 of 1964.
1012 of 1955.
The Judgment of WANCHOO, C. J. and MITTER, J. was delivered by MITTER, J. BHAGAVA, J. delivered a separate Opinion.
The suit was decreed by a Munsif of Sealdah companyrt, 24 Parganas on March 18, 1949 after the Calcutta Thika Tenancy Act of 1949 had companye into force on February 28, 1949.
to the benefit of the Calcutta Thika Tenancy Act, 1949, as amended finally by an Act of 1953.
On the 18th June 1948, the plaintiff, the appellant before us, instituted Suit No.
The facts necessary for the disposal.
6 / 1, Shibtola Lane, Entally, Calcutta .
The appeal filed therefrom by the third defendant was dismissed by the Subordinate Judge.
