GANGA RAM Vs. SMT. PHULWATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this second appeal the main point for consideration is -

(2.) The plaintiff had not led any evidence to show that the endorsement had been made by the postman concerned. In second appeal filed by the tenant the contention is that in the absence of such evidence having been led on behalf of the plaintiff no presumption of service could be made under Sec. 114 of the Indian Eviction Act.

(3.) The appeal came up for hearing first before a learned single Judge, who formulated three points (mentioned hereinafter) for the consideration of a larger Bench, The Division Bench before which this appeal was listed noticed that there was some conflict of opinion in two decisions given by the two Division Benches of this Court during the last two years. In the case of Budhu v/s. Smt. Kamla Narain, 1968 ALJ 707 it was held by a Division Bench of this Court that a presumption about the service of such notice could be raised under Sec. 114 of the Indian Evidence Act, and, when so raised, will be a presumption of fact On the other hand it was held in the case of Dwarka Singh v/s. Ratan Singh Ahuja, 1969 AWR 477 :, 1969 ALJ 849 that in a case like this a presumption with regard to service of notice will have to be raised under Sec. 27 of the General Clauses Act, and that will be a presumption of law. The following three points, originally formulated by the learned single Judge, have, therefore, come up for consideration before this Full Bench : - -