All the suits and the appeals arising therefrom in the Court below were tried together and disposed of by common judgment. Hence all these second appeals are also taken up together and disposed of accordingly.

2. These are nine second ap­peals by the plaintiffs against the judgment and decrees in nine title suits whereby the learned Subordinate Judge reversed the earlier judgment and decrees of the learned Munsiff. The plaintiffs are a company and pur­chased a tea garden owning the lands in suit from the previous owners some time in 1958. They brought these suits for evicting the defendants on the al­legation that they have been on the land under permissive occupation of their predecessors-in-interest as licen­sees. Although they are not entitled to any notice, they gave each of them notice for eviction, with which they did not comply.

3. The defendants submitted written statements almost in identical terms and alleged that they have been on the land from the time of their forefathers for the last hundred years. They denied that they were under permissive occupation of the plaintiffs or in any sense licensees under them. They made a categori­cal assertion that they and their fore­fat

Click Here to Read the rest of this document