Section 80 CPC notice requires strict identity between notice giver and plaintiff; waiver needs clear conduct, not mere silence.

Section 80 CPC notice must strictly comply with the statute and must be issued by the same person who later institutes the suit, including the required particulars of cause of action, parties and relief. A notice given by one plaintiff alone cannot support a suit filed by that plaintiff together with another plaintiff. The provision is mandatory, though its benefit may be waived by the party protected by it. However, waiver must be clear; mere conduct or failure to object at an earlier stage does not, by itself, create estoppel against pleading want of proper notice.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a notice under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure given by one plaintiff alone can support a suit later instituted by that plaintiff together with another plaintiff. (ii) Whether the requirement of notice under Section 80 can be waived by the Government or whether the Government can be estopped from pleading want of proper notice.

Issue (i): Whether a notice under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure given by one plaintiff alone can support a suit later instituted by that plaintiff together with another plaintiff.

Analysis: Section 80 is mandatory and requires strict compliance. The notice must state the cause of action, the name, description and residence of the plaintiff, and the relief claimed by the person who institutes the suit. The notice in this case was issued only on behalf of one plaintiff, but the suit was filed by two plaintiffs. The statutory scheme demands identity between the person giving notice and the person bringing the suit, and no implication or exception can be read into the provision.

Conclusion: The notice was defective and could not support the suit brought by both plaintiffs.

Issue (ii): Whether the requirement of notice under Section 80 can be waived by the Government or whether the Government can be estopped from pleading want of proper notice.

Analysis: The protection afforded by Section 80 is for the benefit of the authority concerned, and there is no inconsistency between the mandatory character of the section and the possibility of waiver by the beneficiary of the notice. On the facts, however, there was no express waiver. The conduct relied upon occurred before an effective suit was instituted, and the defendants were entitled to take the objection when the suit was properly before the court. Mere failure to raise the objection earlier did not create an estoppel.

Conclusion: The respondents neither waived the statutory notice nor were estopped from pleading want of proper notice.

Final Conclusion: The statutory notice requirement was not satisfied, and the suit was liable to fail on that ground.

Ratio Decidendi: A notice under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure must be given by the very person who subsequently institutes the suit, and the beneficiary of the notice may waive it only by clear conduct or expression; absent such waiver, estoppel cannot defeat the statutory objection.

---