Bandhu Lall Munshi vs Sreemutty Lagin and Others

Upon the findings the father of the plaintiff had a lease from year to year in respect of a certain piece of land in the town of Dacca. He was dispossessed brought a suit u/s 9 of the Specific Relief Act and obtained a decree. That decree was executed by the plaintiff his son after his death, and he obtained what is usually called symbolical possession. He how ever did not obtain actual possession and the present suit is for recovery of the same.

The Courts below have dismissed the suit on the ground that nothing remained after the death of the father for him to inherit. The finding however is that it was a lease from year to year. It was therefore property which was transferable u/s 6 of the Transfer of Property Act and on general principles heritable unless there was anything to the contrary in the contract. That there was anything in the contract there is nothing to show. On the other hand it was stipulated as stated in the judgment of the lower Court that before the plaintiff was evicted, he would get 15 days'' notiee. There is no case of notice here.

The plaintiff is therefore entitled to succeed. The lease has not been determined and he still has a subsisting right to remain on the land. The appeal is allowed with costs in all Courts and the suit decreed.