Case Details

Citation(s)
1966 SLG 5143 = 1966 SLD 5143 = 1966 PLD 217
Dacca High Court
Civil Rule No. 1249 of 1960, decided on 5th August 1964.
Presented By: S. M. Murshed, C J. and Abu Md. Abdulla, J  
Tafazzal Hussain Khan for Petitioner.   B. C. Das and Muksudur Rahman for the Opposite-Parties.

ABDUL MALEQUE LASKAR-Petitioner  

VERSUS

  Begum  TAYABUNNESSA  AND OTHERS-Opposite-Parties

Law: East Bengal Non-Agricultural Tenancy Act (XXIII of 1949)

Section: 24(2),23,24,85

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 2

  East Bengal Non-agricultural Tenancy Act (XXIII of 1949), S. 24 (2)-Joint deposit by two plaints-To be deemed by both or either of them jointly.   The correct position in law with regard to joint deposit is that the same sum of money is being deposited by both or either of them jointly. No objection can be taken by the petitioners on the ground that the money was deposited by the husband and wife jointly. He is merely concerned with the deposit.   East Bengal Non-agricultural Tenancy Act (XXIII of 1949), S. 85-Act has not application to certain lands and to certain cases-"Possession" means actual "physical possession".   The East Bengal Non-agricultural Tenancy Act, 1949 has no application in respect of any land vested in or in posses sion of a Port Authority, Railway Administration or a Local Authority.' It is also clear that it will not apply in case of a land acquired by the Central or Provincial Government under the Land Acquisition Act, or under any other law. There is also another classification of land, with regard to which the Act has no application. One such class of land is what has been described under section 85 (1) (d) of the Act. Section 85 (1) (d) applies only to land other than that which comes within the meaning of the other provisions of the said enactment. It is patent that this section, inter alia, seeks to exclude the operation of the Act with regard to land "in the possession of a Port Authority, Railway Administration, Local Authority, or the Central or the Provincial Government.   The operation of the Act is excluded with regard to land which has "vested" or in "is in possession of" a local authority. Similarly it is also, clear that such exclusion also appertains in respect of any land "acquired" by the Central or Provincial Government and also with regard to a land "in the possession of" the said Government. Subsection (2) of section 85 also excludes the operation of the Act with regard to any non-agricultural land "held by a tenant under the Central or Provincial Government". Land held by a tenant under the Central or Provincial…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register