CHABI KONAR Vs. RANJIT KUMAR DEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEFENDANTS are the appellants against this judgment of affirmation. The respondent as plaintiff filed a suit for eviction being Title Suit No.209 of 1999 with the following averments:-

(2.) PANCHU Gopal Konar was a tenant in respect of the suit premises at a rental of Rs.35/- per month payable according to English calendar month under one Probhat Kumar Dutta, the earlier owner. Plaintiff purchased said suit house through a kobala dated 5th May, 1986 and came into possession of other portions of the suit building. In spite of issuance of letter of attornment to the tenant Panchu Gopal Konar, no rent was paid to the plaintiff. Plaintiff later came to know that Panchu Gopal Konar left the suit premises with his wife long back by subletting the same to one Anath Nath Konar without consent of the landlord.

(3.) ORIGINAL defendant Gouribala Konar contested the suit by filing a written statement denying allegations of the plaint and contending inter alia that her husband Panchu Gopal Konar used to carry on business in Calcutta by taking tenancy of the suit premises wherein he used to reside with his wife Gouribala and two nephew namely Anath Nath Konar and Umesh Chandra Konar. They also occasionally visited their village house and never abandoned the suit premises. There was no question of subletting of suit premises to Anath Nath Konar. The defendant was not a defaulter in payment of rent. The plaintiff did not require the suit premises for his own use and occupation and the suit is liable to be dismissed.