AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
2 paragraphs · 102 words
1.
This is an appeal from the decision of the District Judge of Purneah, holding that a deposit purporting to be made u/s 174 of the Bengal Tenancy Act was not a proper deposit within that section. We think the decision of the Judge is quite correct. A deposit u/s 174 must be such as the decree-holder may draw out at once. But the deposit, made in this case, was not made payable to the decree-holder until a certain event had arisen, and, therefore, it was not a deposit within the meaning of that section.
2.
The appeal is dismissed with costs.