INA KAR Vs. AMITAVA GHOSH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff has alleged that the defendant, Amitava Ghosh, was her tenant regarding the disputed premises at 2E, Kala Chand Sanyal Lane, Shyampukur, Calcutta, at a monthly rental of Rs. 250 payable according to the English Calendar. The defendant is a defaulter from November, 1973. He has illegally sublet or transferred a portion of that flat without her permission after the provisions of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956, came into force. She requires the said premises for her own use and occupation, The defendant's tenancy was duly determined by a notice to quit, The suit is for ejectment.

(2.) The defendant filed a written statement denying the plaintiff's allegations and stated that he did not transfer or sublet the premises in question.

(3.) The learned Judge of the City Civil Court disbelieved the plaintiff's version, held that the defendant was not a defaulter and the plaintiff did not require the premises in question for her own use and occupation. He also disbelieved the story of subletting to Sadhan Sarkar. The suit was therefore, dismissed Hence this appeal by the appellant.