Tenant occupation under municipal tax law applies where exclusive possession for consideration exists without service-related residence requirement.

Premises occupied by government employees were held to be let out as tenants, because residence was not required by the contract of service or by the nature of their duties. The evidence showed that some employees occupied the quarters, outsiders were also permitted to reside there, and the occupiers had exclusive possession for consideration, supported by a house allowance arrangement. On those facts, the occupation was not that of servants or mere licensees. The premises were therefore assessable under Section 127(a) of the Calcutta Municipal Act as rented occupation.

---

---

Issues: Whether the premises occupied by government employees were let out to them as tenants so as to attract assessment under Section 127(a) of the Calcutta Municipal Act.

Analysis: The premises were not required to be occupied by all employees under the contract of service, nor was residence necessary for the better performance of their duties. The evidence showed that only some employees occupied quarters, outsiders were also allowed to reside there as tenants, and the employees were free to live elsewhere. The house allowance arrangement and the grant of exclusive possession indicated a separate occupation for consideration rather than a mere servant's residence. On these facts, the occupation could not be treated as that of servants or mere licensees.

Conclusion: The occupiers were tenants and the premises were assessable under Section 127(a) of the Calcutta Municipal Act.

Final Conclusion: The assessment had to proceed on the footing that the premises were let out within the meaning of the municipal provision applicable to rented occupation, and the appeal succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: Where residence in premises owned by the master is not required by the contract of service or by the nature of the duties, and the occupier enjoys exclusive possession for consideration, the occupation is that of a tenant and not of a servant.

---