MIDNAPORE ZEMINDARY COMPANY, LIMITED Vs. SYAMA CHARAN CHOWDHURY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal from the judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge in a rent suit, and it is in respect of rent from the last quarter of 1317 up to Pous quarter of 1319, and the defence is that the defendants have paid rent to the superior landlords in pursuance of an arrangement which they had with one Uakhina Kali Debi who was, at the time the arrangement was made, their immediate landlord.

(2.) Now, the plaintiffs claim as transferees of Dakhina Kali Debi s interest, and the only question that has troubled us in this matter is the question whether the defendants had in fact notice of the transfer from Dakhina Kali Debi to the plaintiffs before they had paid the rent to the superior landlords, because it has been found as a fact that they paid the rent for the period in question to the superior landlords and the learned Subordinate Judge has given a modified decree for sixty rupees per annum, which constitutes the balance due to the defendants immediate landlord after the defendants had paid the superior landlords rent. On this point the issue, which was raised in the first Court, was the third, namely, " Did plaintiffs give notice of their purchase to defendants Nos. 1 to 3 ?"

(3.) The first Court held that the defendants in fast obtained notice of the plaintiffs purchase, and the learned Munsif based his finding upon two matters: first, there was the document, Exhibit III, which purports to be a receipt or receipts of tenants of the taking of possession, and was addressed to one Umesh Chandra Ghoshal, gomasti, who, we understand, was the gbmasta of the plaintiffs; and signed by eleven individuals, and, the body of the document runs as follows. " The Midnapore Zamindary Company Limited " (who are the plaintiffs in this suit) "have purchased by a deed of sale (khas kobala) from Srijukta Dakhina Kali Debi her Debipur Pattani right " (then it gives the details), "To-day you with men and persons and drums and timbers having come to Debipur village and having met with the tenants and having visited and demarcated the boundaries of Debipur Mouza and having fixed a bamboo in a prominent place and having obtained possession by beat of drums and we having witnessed it, we hereby sign our names." Then it appears that one of the persons who signed that document was the Naib of the defendants. It is alleged that it was also signed by the goinasta of the defendants but the learned Subordinate Judge has said that the gomasta was called as a witness and he denied his signature: and I gather from that that the learned Subordinate Judge was not satisfied that he had signed it,--although there is no definite finding: but the learned Munsif found that the Naib of the defendants was one of the persons who had signed it; and, therefore, I presume he came to the conclusion from that fact that it must be inferred that the defendants had notice of this sale. The further matter upon which the learned Munsif relied was this, "Dakhina Kali had deposed that shortly after the plaintiffs purchase the defendants Nos. 1 to 3 wanted to pay her rents, when she told them to pay to the plaintiffs." The learned Munsif on these two facts came to the conclusion that the defendants had obtained notice of the plaintiffs purchase.