QADIR BAKHSH Vs. PRAG NARAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three appeals arise out of a suit brought by the respondents for the ejectment of the appellants from a plot of land in the city of Agra. The case stated in the plaint was that the six defendants were tenants of the land paying three annas a month as rent, that for five years preceding the suit the defendants had paid no rant, though they had been repeatedly required to do so, and that they had forfeited their lease by non-payment of the rent. There were other allegations regarding constructions on the land, with which we are not now concerned. The defendants filed their written statement in Jun9 1910. In September 1910, the plaintiffs applied to the Court for permission to amend their plaint by inserting in it an allegation that two of the defendants had denied the plaintiff s title to the land. The plaint was amended and the defendants were given an opportunity of filing a fresh written statement. They then denied that they had forfeited their lease either by non-payment of rent or by denying the plaintiffs title. They pleaded that they were perpetual lessees of the land and also that the suit was not maintainable as the plaintiffs had not given them formal notice to quit.

(2.) The Munsif found that the plaintiffs title in respect of half of the land had been denied by the defendant Khuda Baksh, and he gave the plaintiffs a decree for the ejectment of that defendant, and for possession of half of the land. On appeal, the Subordinate Judge gave the plaintiffs a decree for possession of the whole of the land, holding that they had forfeited their lease both by nonpayment of rent and also by denial of plaintiffs title.

(3.) The first question discussed in this Court was whether the defendants held as perpetual lessees or as tenants from month to month. In the view which I take of the case it is unnecessary to decide this question.