GEETA BOSE Vs. MACHINE TOOLS OF INDIA LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The application filed by the plaintiffs for leave to withdraw from the present suit with liberty to sue the defendant afresh ought to have been allowed and the impugned order, giving rise to this revision, rejecting the application, must be quashed.

(2.) The plaintiffs-petitioners, after acquiring the house in 1981, have filed the present suit in 1982 for eviction of the defendant-respondent on the ground of unauthorised sub-letting and several other grounds. The suit having been 51ed within three years of the acquisition of the house by the plaintiffs, could not be grounded on the reasonable requirements of the plaintiffs for own occupation, even if such a ground was then existing, in view of the provisions of sub-section (3A) of section 13 of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956, countermanding institution of suit on that ground before the expiry of such period. The period of three years has however expired during the pendency of the suit and on such expiry the plaintiffs applied to amend the plaint to include the ground of reasonable requirement; but the application was rightly rejected as any such amendment, if allowed, would have rendered the mandate of section 13(3A) almost infructous and the position in law on this point is now absolutely well-settled. To allow the plaintiff to include the ground of reasonable requirement in a plaint in a pending suit, instituted before the expiry of three years after acquisition, even though the period of three years has expired when the amendment is applied for, would virtually enable him to do precisely what the law prohibits him from doing.

(3.) The plaintiffs then have applied for leave to withdraw from the present suit with liberty to sue the defendant afresh on the grounds sued upon as well as the ground of reasonable requirement. The Court below has rejected that application and has ruled that the plaintiffs cannot be granted that liberty. We do not know why.