Kolkata Court September 1844 Judgments

Barhamdeo NaraIn Sing Vs. Mackenzie and anr.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (1884)ILR10Cal1095

Mitter and Pigot, JJ.1. These appeals arise out of suits instituted by the plaintiff, who is the lessor of the mouzah in which the lands in suit are situated, to eject the defendants from their holdings.2. Amongst other pleas, the defendants pleaded want of sufficient notice, and set up their right of occupancy in bar of the plaintiff's claim for ejectment. As regards the notice, the admitted facts are these: The notice itself is dated 19th Bysack 1288, corresponding with the 3rd May 1881. The notice informed the ryot that he was to quit his holding within seven days. It was served on the ryot on the 23rd Bysack 1288, corresponding with the 7th of May 1881, and the present suits were brought on the 13th of May 1881, that is to say, one day before the term given in the notice expired. Upon both these points issues were framed by the Munsif, who came to the conclusion that the defendant's plea, as regards the insufficiency of notice, was fully made out, but the Munsif's finding was again...