The Calcutta Weekly Notes Law Notes and Notes of Cases of the Calcutta High Court and of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and the English Courts Monday January 15 1906

THE QUESTIONS FOR THE DECISION OF THE CASE WERE whether the manager obtained the necessary orders from the Court of Wards to renew the lease and whether if he did not receive any such orders the renewal of the lease was binding upon the Defendant It appears that no evidence was offered on either side as to the orders passed by the Court of Wanes under that section. [...] Justice Mookerjee held that under the provisions of the Court of Wards Act the manager had no prim4 fade right to renew the lease and as there was no evidence of an order passed by the " Court " in the case it must be assumed that the lease was renewed by the manager without the orders of the " Court." Thus it is clear that one of their Lorships threw the onus on the Defendant while the oth [...] 39 of the Act IX B. C. of 1879 seems to indicate that the manager has no authority to renew a lease without the sanction of the "Court." But it is held in this case that the renewal of the lease is voidable at the option of the Plaintiff whose estate was under the Court of Wards but not voidable at the option of the tenant. [...] We may also point out that the suit of the Plaintiff was in the nature of a suit for the specific performance of the contract of the Defedant as embodied in the renewed lease. [...] And upon such facts the question arose what was the power and the duty of the presiding Judge ? Ought he to withdraw the case from the jury and with his own hand enter a verdict for the Defendant or ought he to leave the case to the jury asking them if they thought the facts proved justified the dismissal of the Plaintiff?