RASH BEHARI CHOWDHURY Vs. UPENDRA NATH SAHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IT is obvious that the suit has been rightly dismissed. The claim is founded on the assumption that the tenancy was forfeited by transfer on the 15th April 1906, inasmuch as it was a non transferable holding. IT transpires that subsequent to that date the plaintiff repeatedly sued the original tenant for rent, for periods subsequent to the transfer. That was a waiver of the forfeiture: and, if the forfeiture of the 15th April 1906 is not operative now, the original tenancy is still in subsistence and no decree for ejectment can be made in favour of the plaintiff.

(2.) THE appeal is dismissed with costs.