SAROJ KUMAR BOSE versus KANAILAL MONDAL & ORS.

Citation: [1985] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 393 · Decided: 06-08-1985 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: E.S. VENKATARAMIAH · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

393 
SAROJ KllllAR BOSE 
A 
v. 
KANAILAL lllNDAL & ORS. 
AUGUST 6, 1985 
[E.S. VENKATARAMIAH AND R.B. MISRA JJ ·] 
B 
West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953 sections 4,5 and 
6. 
, Tank fisheries -, Whether vest in State or intermediary -
Tank fishery - What is - Retention of possession by intermediary 
C 
- Khas possession - Whether essential. 
The respondents' Ptedecessor-in-interest took a permanent 
lease of fishery , right in a tank without the sub-soil from 
different sets of proprietors by virtue of registered Xabuliyats 
dated 4th November 1914 and came in possession thereof. There-
D 
after on 14th June 1952 they in their turn granted a regiatered 
lease of the said fishery right to the appellant for a tem of 11 
years up to and including the Bengali year 1369. 
Under the West Bengal Eststes Acquisition Act, 1953, the 
interest of intermediaries vested in the State with effect from 
15th April, 1955. 
E 
The respondents filed a suit for, the recovery of rent for 
the years 1361 and 1362 B.S. together with interest. The claim 
was resisted by the appellant and it was averred that the 
interest in the fishery had vested in the State from 1362 B.s. 
and so the contract created by the,lease had been frustrated, and 
that he was not liable to pay rent for 1362 11.s. and that the 
last year's rent deposited in advance was to be credited towards 
rent for 1361 B.s. The Munsif decreed the suit in part holding 
that the interest of the plaintiff-respondents did not vest in 
the State, it being a tank fishery, the lease cuntiwed to 
subsist and the rent for 1360 B.S. paid in advance could not be 
credited towards rent for 1361 B.S. This order was upheld by the 
Subordinate Judge as well as the High Court. 
In the appeals to this Court, on the question whether the 
right and interest of the plaintiff-respondents had come to an 
F 
G 
end by virtue of the coming into force of the West Bengal Estates 
, H 
Acquisition Act, 1953, 
A 
B 
c 
394 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1985] SUPP;2 s.c.R. 
Dilllisaing the Appeal, 
llilLlh 1. On a plaia reading of eectiw 6 of the V.t flnaal 
Estates .Acqu.l.sition Act 1953 ta..,Jr. fisheriea will not ..ut in the 
State but v1ll be retaimd by an intermeclimy, In the illstat 
case, even aalhlaing that the plaintiff• ere inte~NI their 
right in the tank fishery ciid not com to an ena. [396 J.1) 
2. Xhaa poueaaion ia aot a l!eCe&B&ry couditi<11t for retllia-
ing the property by an intemecliary. In the instant case, the 
intereat of the plaintiffs did not vest in the State either u 
teunte or aa interaediarl.ea. The ev.tdence ·~ that the pWn-
tiffs have the status of t81l&tlte 'llbich baa baa recogniaed by the 
Goveraent by accepting rent frm tbea. [ 397 A-I) 
3. The fisbery in diapote is a taalt fishery and satiafiu 
the reqniremnta of the ezplanation added to clanH (e) of 
nb-aection (1) of section 6. [397 E] 
4. !be provieiona of Chapter VI of tbQ kt were gf.wn 
effect to from Bsisalth 1363 11.s. ?be . preaeat cue imolvea 
D 
recovery of rent for the yeara 1361 and 1362 11.a. There vu no 
difficnlty in tecOVerina the rent for the year 1361 and 1362 a.s. 
iM-h u ftetJ non-agricultural tenant holding any land lllldar 
an intermadi&ry ud uery raiy11t holding any land Wider an inter-
.ecliary aball hold the 1M1111e directly under the State. The defen-
dant got the lad ander a ].Que and camiot deny right and title 
E 
of the plaintiffs at the Ctl!!IM!!caent of the l:ellaDcy• It baa not 
beea •1-n that the laa•or 1 s title bu aubeeqaently CClall! to an 
end. Couideriog fro.a any upect there is no escape frm the 
conclnaion that the plaintiffs still retain their rights in 
respect of the tank fishery and they are entitled to reco-.er the 
F 
rent for the years 1361 end 1362 11.s. [397 G-H, 398 A) 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeals Nos. 
887-888 
of 1971. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 11.4.1963 of the Calcutta 
High Court in Appeals from Appellate Decrees Nos. 958/57 and 549 
G 
of 1961. 
D .N. Mukhar jee for the Appellant. 
P:K. Chatterjee and Rathin Dass for the Respondents. 
R 
S.K.BOSE v. KANAILAL IKJNDAL [MISRA, J.] 
395 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
MISRA,J. 
The 
present 
two 
certificate are directed against the 
of Calcutta dated 11th April, 1963. 
consolidated 
appeals 
by 
judgment of the High Court 
Tl\e dispute between the parties centres round a Jalkar 
fishery right in a tank known as Teremara Jalkar situate in 
village Chandiguri in the district Of 24

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.