RAJENDRA KISHORE CHOUDHURY Vs. KUMUD BAN MAHATA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We think that the Courts below were wrong in holding that the decision in the previous suit operated as res judicata upon the question whether the defendant had a permanent tenancy or not.

(2.) In the previous suit for ejectment the defendant pleaded that he was a permanent tenant and that the suit must fail as no notice to quit was served upon him.

(3.) The Court in that suit held that the suit must fail for want of notice to quit. It also came to the finding that the defendant had failed to prove that he had a permanent tenancy. The decree was one of dismissal and was in favour of the defendant in spite of the adverse finding against him with regard to the question of his status. The defendant, therefore, could not appeal against that finding.