LawCite Search | LawCite Markup Tool | Help | Feedback

Law
Cite


Cases Referring to this Case | Law Reform Reports Referring to this Case | Law Journal Articles Referring to this Case | Legislation Cited | Cases and Articles Cited

Help

Bibi Samsunnehar v Hari Nath   flag 

[1942] AllINRprCal 34; [1943] AIR Cal 91
All India Reporter - Calcutta
India - West Bengal
12th May, 1942

Cases and Articles Cited

Case Name Citation(s) †  Court Jurisdiction Date Full Text Citation Index
[1943] Cal 89 [1943] Cal 89 United States - California circa 1943 flag 2
Carron Iron Co v Maclaren [1855] EngR 700; (1855) 5 HLCas 416; 10 ER 961 House of Lords United Kingdom 22 Feb 1866 CommonLII flag 53
112 IC 71 112 IC 71 United Kingdom flag 1
36 Cal 233 36 Cal 233 United States - California flag 3
Chand v Gopal Ram,' 34 Cal 101 United States - California flag 9
Note "No second appeal was given with the result that after the said finding of fact '* surrender the rent became Rs 12-l3-5gds and (b) Landlord and tenant--Separate tenancies the plaintiff has claimed in this suit rent at 4 and B amalgamated--Tenant dispossessed by this rate from the year 1342 to the Asar kist landlord from portion of A--Tenant can claim of 1345 The material defences taken by the suspension of rent only of A When two plots of land forming separate tenancies defendant are two in number First of all he with separate assessment of rent are amalgamated so said that the two enhancements of rent of the as to form one tenancy in the eye of law and the parent jama of 50 bighas, namely, the enhance tenant is dispossessed by the landlord from a portion of ment to Rs l3-2-l8gds and subsequently to one of the plots, the tenant cannot claim suspension of the whole rent but only of tbe rent of the plot from Rs 16-5-igd were illegal enhancements, inas a portion of which he has been dispossessed : ( 29) 16 much as those enhancements contravened the India - West Bengal circa 1929 flag 2

LawCite: Privacy | Disclaimers | Conditions of Use | Acknowledgements | Feedback