https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274299 A settlement order under Section 105 of the Bengal Tenancy Act did not bar inquiry into the real rent in a later suit because the earlier proceeding decided only the rate of enhancement and did not adjudicate the existing rent of the holding. Where the true rent had not been raised or determined, the plaintiffs could prove and recover the rent at the correct rate. The record also showed that the earlier khatian entry and the proceedings founded on it were procured by fraud and collusion, and such an order could be impeached in the same suit in which it was relied on as a bar. The objection based on Section 107 therefore failed. en-us Mon, 26 Mar 1928 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Aug 2018 12:54:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274299 A settlement order under Section 105 of the Bengal Tenancy Act did not bar inquiry into the real rent in a later suit because the earlier proceeding decided only the rate of enhancement and did not adjudicate the existing rent of the holding. Where the true rent had not been raised or determined, the plaintiffs could prove and recover the rent at the correct rate. The record also showed that the earlier khatian entry and the proceedings founded on it were procured by fraud and collusion, and such an order could be impeached in the same suit in which it was relied on as a bar. The objection based on Section 107 therefore failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 26 Mar 1928 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274299