JUDGMENT :- This is an appeal by the State of U.P. arising out of the following facts:

The plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for ejectment of the State of U.P. and the Civil Surgeon, Dehradun on the ground of their being in arrears of rent for more than three months and had not been paid in spite of notice. The premises was taken for running a hospital. The tenancy was from month to month but the rent was to be paid annually to the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs therefore filed the suit for arrears of rent and ejectment after serving notices under S.106 of the Transfer of Property Act and Section 80, C.P.C.

2. The suit was contested by the State of U.P. on the ground that the notice under Section 80, C.P.C., was bad and that the tenancy was an annual tenancy and the rent had to be paid by the end of March.

3. The trial Court and the lower appellate Court held that the tenancy was from month to month. Now this fact is not in controversy. The suit of the plaintiff was decreed by the trial Court on the finding that the notices were good and there was arrears of rent for more than three months. The State of U.P. filed an appeal before the District Judge. The District Judge dismissed the appea

Click Here to Read the rest of this document