https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289042 Section 50 of the Bengal Tenancy Act was construed consistently with the Act's definition of "rent" in Section 3(5), so the statutory presumption applied to rent payable in money, in kind, or partly in both forms. The Court held that the term could not be confined to cash rent merely because of legislative history, and that Select Committee proceedings could not be used to cut down the plain meaning of the enacted text. On that construction, tenants were entitled to the benefit of Section 50 and the contrary view taken below was rejected. en-us Mon, 07 Aug 1922 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Jul 2020 14:11:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289042 Section 50 of the Bengal Tenancy Act was construed consistently with the Act's definition of "rent" in Section 3(5), so the statutory presumption applied to rent payable in money, in kind, or partly in both forms. The Court held that the term could not be confined to cash rent merely because of legislative history, and that Select Committee proceedings could not be used to cut down the plain meaning of the enacted text. On that construction, tenants were entitled to the benefit of Section 50 and the contrary view taken below was rejected. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 07 Aug 1922 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289042