Authored By : Henry Thoby Princep, Beverley

Henry Thoby Princep and Beverley, JJ.

1. In this case the plaintiff states that she is one ofthree land-lords of the defendants, tenants, and she sues for the entire rentdue from the tenants, making her co-sharers defendants also because theyrefused to join in the suit.

2. The Munsiff dismissed the suit, holding that it wasbarred under Section 188 of the Bengal Tenancy Act, but on appeal the DistrictJudge has set aside that decision, on the ground that Section 188 does notapply.

3. In our opinion the view taken by the District Judge iscorrect. Section 188 applies only to anything which the landlord is, under theBengal Tenancy Act, required or authorised to do. We can find nothing in theAct which authoresses a landlord to bring a suit against a tenant for recoveryof arrears of rent. The terms of the section should, in our opinion, bestrictly construed, for we cannot assume that the Legislature intended to alterthe practice of our Courts as established by numerous decisions for years, past(1). The appeal is, therefore, dismissed with costs.

.

Mokshoda Debi vs. Prem Chand Nuskur and Ors. (17.01.1887 -CALHC)