1943 (2) TMI 15 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Recovery of arrears of rent
2. Commutation of paddy rent to money rent
3. Entitlement to reduction of rent under Section 38, Ben. Ten. Act
4. Interpretation of "temporary cause" in the context of economic depression
5. Judicial discretion under Section 38(2), Ben. Ten. Act

Detailed Analysis:

1. Recovery of Arrears of Rent:
The suit was initiated by the plaintiff for the recovery of arrears of rent for an occupancy holding for the years 1342 to 1845 B.S. The original rent was Rs. 31-2-0 and 7 1/2 maps of paddy per annum, which was commuted to Rs. 85 per annum in 1923 under Section 40, Ben. Ten. Act.

2. Commutation of Paddy Rent to Money Rent:
The commutation of the paddy rent to money rent was done in 1923, resulting in a total rent of Rs. 85 per annum. This commutation was relevant as the defendants claimed a reduction in this rent under Section 38, Ben. Ten. Act, citing a fall in the average local prices of staple food crops.

3. Entitlement to Reduction of Rent under Section 38, Ben. Ten. Act:
The defendants claimed a reduction of rent under Section 38, Ben. Ten. Act, arguing that there had been a fall in the average local prices of staple food crops not due to a temporary cause. The learned Munsif upheld this claim, finding a considerable fall in the average local prices of paddy and that the cause of the fall was not temporary. He allowed a reduction of 1/4th of the rent effective from 1345 B.S. due to Section 40A, Ben. Ten. Act, which prevents reduction for 15 years post-commutation.

4. Interpretation of "Temporary Cause" in the Context of Economic Depression:
The learned Subordinate Judge reversed the Munsif's decision, holding that the fall in prices was due to a temporary cause, specifically the world economic depression. He relied on the observation of Terrell C.J. in Nathuni Thakur v. Ram Saran Singh, interpreting the economic depression as temporary. However, this interpretation was challenged as the Subordinate Judge's reliance on the supposed authority was misread and misunderstood. The judgment emphasized that the term "temporary" means "lasting or intended to last only for a time" and highlighted the complexity and indefinite nature of the economic depression, making it difficult to categorize as temporary.

5. Judicial Discretion under Section 38(2), Ben. Ten. Act:
The Subordinate Judge exercised discretion under Section 38(2), Ben. Ten. Act, against the defendants, influenced by factors considered during the commutation proceedings. He considered the prevailing rate of rent, average prices of staple food crops, and average yield of the lands. However, his decision was influenced by erroneous conceptions of these factors, particularly the period for prevailing rate comparison and the fairness of the rent-to-yield ratio.

The appeal was allowed, setting aside the judgment and decree of the Court of appeal below. The case was remitted for disposal according to law, considering the observations made regarding the interpretation of "temporary cause" and the exercise of judicial discretion. The parties were to bear their respective costs in the Court, with further costs abiding the result. Leave to appeal under cl.15 of the Letters Patent was refused.