SATYA SRI GHOSHAL Vs. KARTIK CHANDRA DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal arises out of a suit to eject the defendants from a piece of land in Kidderpore on the ground that they are monthly tenants to whom due notice to quit has been given. The lower Appellate Court, reversing the decree of the Court of first instance, has dismissed the plaintiffs suit with costs holding that the defendants have a permanent tenancy.

(2.) From this decree the plaintiffs have appealed. It cannot be said in the light of the decided cases that there are no materials to justify the lower Appellate Court s view; but it has to be borne in mind that the conclusion rests not on direct proof but on presumption.

(3.) The presumption in favour of a permanent tenancy implies that there is ground for inferring that the tenure was always intended to be and always was hereditary, or that it acquired that character by subsequent grant. But a presumption in favour of a transaction assumes its regularity: it cannot be made in favour of that which offends legal principle. It is this that prevents our accepting the view of the lower Appellate Court as final, for it would seem that the property to which the presumption has been applied is debutter.