Landlords must comply with procedural requirements under the Assam Ceiling Act before evicting tenants; non-compliance invalidates eviction claims.

1. This second appeal is by the defendants haying lost in both the courts below in a suit instituted by the plaintiff on 1st June, 1961 for their eviction from the agricultural lands measuring about 4 B. 16 K. 13 Ch. The plaintiff also got a decree for recovery of rent which is not at all disputed by the defendants.

2. The plaintiff's case is that the defendants held the suit land as his tenants by executing a kabuliat on 11th February, 1953 for a period of three years and thereafter they were holding over. A rent suit was earlier instituted by the plaintiff against the defendants for recovery of rent and that was decreed. The plaintiff wants khas possession of the suit land which is adjacent to his homestead land and he claims that it is necessary for his own use. The defendants admitted the tenancy, but pleaded that they were tenants since long before 1953 for about 30 years in the case of R.S. Patta No.14 and for about 12 or 13 years in case of R. S. Patta No.20. Hence they acquired occupancy right over the suit land and are not liable for eviction.

3. The court below held that the notice of eviction was valid and that is not challenged before us. It found that the defendants were tenants since only 11th February 1953 on the strength of the kabuliat. Hence it also held that the defendants did not acquire occupancy right over the suit land. It further held that the plaintiff required the land for his own use. The court also found that the plaintiff had less than 100 bighas of land and the defendants had more than 10 bighas under their own cultivation. On the two last findings of fact the court held that S.23 of the Assam Fixation of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1956 (Assam Act I of 1957) hereinafter called the 'Ceiling Act', is no bar to the eviction of the defendants from the suit land.

4. The principal point which is canvassed before us by Mr. Mazumdar the learned counsel for the appellants, is that the learned court below erred in passing a decree of eviction in view of the provisions of S.23(b) of the Ceiling Act. We may therefore turn to the material provisions of the Act:
S.4(1):
"Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any law, custom or agreement no person shall been titled to hold as owner or tenant, lands, which exceed the limit of 150 bighas in the aggregate:
 xxxx xxxx xxxx"
S.5:
"Any person who, on the date of commencement of this Act holds as owner or tenant lands, which in the aggregate, exceed the limit fixed under S.4 above, shall within the prescribed period, submit to the Collector a return giving the particulars of all his lands in the prescribed form and stating therein his selection of plot or plots of lands (not exceeding in the aggregate the limit fixed under S.4 above) which he desires to retain under the provision of this Act."
Under S.6, the Collector can obtain information regarding lands through other agency. Under S.7, the Collector has to prepare a draft statement and the procedure thereto and thereafter is detailed in the section. Under S.8, the State Government acquires the excess lands by publishing in the official Gazette, and, under S.9, on publication of the notification all rights, title and interests of the persons in such excess lands stand transferred to the Government free from encumbrances. Chapter III provides for disposal of excess land, and S.16 to 18 deal with the manner of disposal of excess land. Chapter IV deals with excess land under annual lease and Chapter V with ceiling on future acquisition of land exceeding the ceiling fixed under the Act. S.23, which occurs in Chapter VI with the title "Ceiling for resumption of land from tenants for personal cultivation by the lan