AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Kulwant Sahay, J.—The learned Subordinate Judge has dismissed the plaintiffs suit u/s 155 of the Bengal Tenancy Act on various grounds, One of the grounds being that the terms of the notice alleged to have been served u/s 155 have not been established. It was essential for the plaintiff in order to succeed in the present action to prove what the terms of the notice were. The law requires that the notice must set out the misuse complained of and must ask the defendant to remedy the misuse within a specified time and to pay a reasonable compensation; in default to quit the land. The defendant denies the receipt of the notice. It is clear that unless the plaintiff proves the terms of the notice he is not entitled to succeed. The learned Subordinate Judge has found it as a fact that the terms of the notice alleged to have been served have not been proved. He has gone further and says that the service of the notice has not been established. Upon these findings the appeal is dismissed with costs.
Das, J.
I agree.