KUNJ BIHARI THAKUR Vs. UMASHANKAR PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the defendant arising out of a suit for ejectment. The plaintiff was the proprietor of certain zirat land which he alleged that he had verbally settled with the defendant for one year only, viz. 1339 Fasti. The tenancy expired at the end of the agricultural year, i.e. on 14 September 1932, and the suit was brought on 14 August 1933. The defense was that the defendant has been holding the land in suit since the year 1309; and he produced receipts which the Munsif accepted and held that the defendant had occupancy rights under the provisions of the Bengal Tenancy Act, Section 116 of the Act hot being applicable to bar the acquisition of those rights, because the land had not been let on a lease for a term of years or on a lease from year to year.

(2.) The District Judge on appeal held that the tenancy was a new tenancy beginning in the year 1339 Fasli, and that the defendant bad no right to hold over after the expiry of that year.

(3.) In second appeal it is faintly contended that the findings of the lower Appellate Court are not good findings of fact because the learned District Judge has not considered the evidence regarding the defendant's long possession which had been accepted by the Munsif. I think, however, that the District Judge having recorded findings of fact, I am not in al position to reopen the matter merely because some items of evidence may not have been considered. The facts will, therefore, be taken to be as stated.