SAILENDRA NATH GHOSAL Vs. ENA DUTTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) : This appeal under Clause (15) of the Letters Patent against the judgment of our learned brother Salil Kumar Dutt, J. is at the instance of the defendant in a suit for ejectment.

(2.) The plaintiff instituted a suit for ejectment against the defendant on the ground of reasonable requirement of the suit premises. The case of the plaintiff was that the defendant had been a tenant under one Biswanath Mallick in respect of the suit premises which is the ground floor of premises No. 89/A, Garpar Road, Calcutta at a monthly rent of Rs. 28/- payable according to the English calendar month. The plaintiff purchased the premises No. 89/A, Garpar Road from its owner for valuable consideration by a registered conveyance dated February 18, 1966. As the plaintiff required the suit premises for her own use and occupation, she determined the tenancy of the defendant by a notice to quit and that the defendant not having vacated the suit premises in terms of the notice, the suit was instituted by the plaintiff for ejectment of the defendant from the suit premises.

(3.) The defendant denied that the plaintiff was the owner of the suit premises. It was alleged by the defendant that the premises No. 89/A, Garpar Road was purchased by the plaintiff's husband and his brothers in the benami of the plaintiff. The defendant contended that the suit was not maintainable at the instance o the plaintiff. The defendant also denied that the plaintiff reasonably required the suit premises for her own use and occupation. It was alleged that the suit was instituted by the plaintiff with the ulterior motive for obtaining higher rent.