DULIN CHAND DUTTA Vs. RENUKA BANERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is the defendant's appeal, arising out of a suit for ejectment. The suit is in respect of premises no. 8, Mohun Bagan Lane. The plaintiff claims to be a purchaser from the previous landlord under a kobala or deed of purchase dated November 21, 1956, registered on November 23 of the same year. The defendant, who was a tenant under the previous landlord, continued to be the tenant under the plaintiff on proper attornment. The rent was Rs. 36/- per month, payable according to the Bengali calendar month. A notice, dated 20th Pous 1363 B. S. , corresponding to March 4, 1957, described as a notice of ejectment, appears to have been served on the defendant sometime in the said month of Pous. By the said notice, the defendant was asked to quit and vacate the disputed premises on the expiry of the month of Magh 1363 B. S. In the notice, the ground also was stated, which, according to the plaintiff, was the ground of asking the defendant to quit and vacate the suit premises and the said ground was stated to be that the disputed property was purchased by the plaintiff for her own occupation that she was in a rented house, in which her accommodation was insufficient, and accordingly, she required the present disputed house reasonably for her own occupation.

(2.) THE defence, inter alia, was that the above notice was invalid, both as a notice to quit and also as a notice of suit. On the above pleadings, a specific issue was raised, as issue No. 5, on the question of validity and sufficiency of the above notice.

(3.) THE defence also disputed the plaintiff's claim of reasonable requirement and her plea of inadequate accommodation in her rented premises and the defence rejoinder on the said point was that the plaintiff was living comfortably in her rented house.