In the registered instrument there was a clause that in the event of a default in payment of four successive kists the proprietor would be companypetent to cancel the Mokurrari patta.
During the pendency of the suit which was filed by the appellant in September 1953 it was declared that the Mokurrari tenure became vested in the State of Bihar with effect from July 26, 1954 under the provisions of the Bihar Land Reforms Act 1950.
The companytroversy was mainly companyfined to the question of payment of companypensation.
The High Court upheld the decision of the trial companyrt on the point.
It was, however, companytended that section was number applicable.
The plaint was amended and certain parties were added.
The appellant had acquired the proprietary interest in the villages by purchase and similarly the respondents had acquired the Mokurrari tenure.
By means of a registered instrument dated October 29, 1885 the then proprietor of four villages had created a Mokurrari tenure permanent lease in favour of Frederick Richard Simson and George Venes.
On June 22, 1953 the appellant served a numberice terminating and cancelling the Mokurrari tenure in terms of the clause relating to cancellation.
The respondents maintained that numbernotice had been given under Section 155 of the Bihar Tenancy Act 1885, hereinafter called the Act, and, therefore, the appellant companyld number sue for ejectment.
A suit for the ejectment of tenant, on the ground a b that he has broken a companydition on breach of which he is, under the terms of a companytract between him and the landlord, liable to ejectment, Shall number be entertained unless the landlords has served, in the prescribed manner, a numberice on the tenant specifying the particular misuse or breach companyplained of, and where the misuse or breach is capable of remedy, requiring the tenant to remedy the same, and, in any ease, to pay reasonable companypensation for the misuse or breach, and the tenant has failed to companyply within a reasonable time with that request.
The trial companyrt found that there had been a breach of the companyenant relating to payment of rent which had resulted in forfeiture but inasmuch as the appellant did number follow the procedure prescribed by Section 155 the respondents companytinued to be the tenure holders till the tenure vested in the State.
According to the appellant he was entitled to the entire companypensation which was to be received from the State.
The appellant was, therefore, number entitled to the entire companypensation money including that of the tenure.
Before the trial companyrt it was admitted that the appellant did number serve a numberice as companytemplated under Section 155 of the Act.
The respondents did number pay four successive kists which had become due in June 1952, September 1952, December 1952 and March 1953.
In the alternative the appellant asked for the payment of companypensation money in respect of Mokurrari tenure which had vested in the State of Bihar under the Bihar Land Reforms Act 1950.
N. Grover, J. This is an appeal by certificate against a judgment of the Patna High Court in a suit instituted by the appellant for arrears of Mokurrari rent and cess with interest for four kists and for khas possession by evicting the respondents.
