- (1.) This appeal is by the Plaintiffs and it arises out of a suit for ejectment.
(2.) The suit has been dismissed by the learned trial Judge upon the finding that the old tenancy of the Defendant's father, which, ultimately, on the latter's death, devolved upon the Defendant and his mother and brothers, including two minors and sisters, was still subsisting; and had not been terminated and, accordingly, the Plaintiffs were not entitled to khas possession and so not entitled to a decree for eviction in the instant suit.
(3.) The following facts are not in dispute: That the Plaintiffs are the owners of the disputed premises; that, under the Plaintiffs, Haricharan De, father of the Defendant, was a tenant of the disputed premises. That Haricharan died and, upon his death, his above tenancy devolved upon his sons, including the present Defendant, of whom two were minors, at least, at the date of the suit, and daughters and widow. The Defendant, however, appears to have taken out a tenancy in his own name and/or had been paying rents on account of that tenancy to the Plaintiffs in his (Defendant's) name, although the Defendant, along with some, at least, of the above heirs of Haricharan, were actually occupying the disputed premises.;