RAM PROSAD SING Vs. SONATAN GHOSE BAJAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is by the Defendant in a suit for ejectment and for recovery of arrears of rent and mesne profits, on the allegation that the Defendant's tenancy had been determined by notice to quit. The defence was two-fold; first that there was no valid notice and secondly that the rent was Section 7-8 instead of Rs. 8-2 as claimed by the Plaintiff.

(2.) The courts below have rejected the defence contentions and round that the notice was valid and sufficient and there was determination of the tenancy in accordance with law. They have also given a decree at the rate of Rs. 8-2 as claimed by the Plaintiff for arrears of rent and also at the same rate for mesne profits.

(3.) The suit was instituted on November 20, 1945 and was decreed by the trial court on June 14, 1947. This was affirmed on appeal on March 27, 1948. The second appeal to this Court was presented on July 12, 1948 and was pending on the date, the Calcutta Thika Tenancy Ordinance, 1948, came into force and was pending in this Court on February 28, 1949, when the Calcutta Thika Tenancy Act, 1949, came into force, on October 21, 1952, when the Calcutta Thika Tenancy (Amendment) Ordinance, 1952, came into force and again in 1953 when the Calcutta Thika Tenancy Act, 1953, came into force.