SANJUA URAO Vs. MATADIN AGARWALLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has arisen from a suit which was instituted for recovery of khas possession. The plaintiffs were the holders of a jote in the Western Duars, under which there was chukani tenancy held by one Chakli Bewa, under whom the defendants allege they were darchukanidars. The chukani was sold for arrears of rent and was purchased by the plaintiffs who served a notice on the defendant under Section 167, Ben. Ten. Act for annulling the encumbrance and thereafter commenced this action. The defence was that the defendants had occupancy rights in the lands and so were protected from eviction.

(2.) The suit has been decreed by both the Courts below. One of the defendants has appealed.

(3.) The appellant's contention, to put it quite shortly, is that the Courts below have misconceived the terms of the notification by which the Bengal Tenancy Act was extended to the Western Duars, and, upon an erroneous view thereof, have not tried to find out the incidents of the defendant's darchukani tenancy and have thus omitted to decide the real points that arise in the case.