(1.) THIS appeal is at the instance of the plaintiff and it arises out of a suit for eviction.
(2.) THE defendant had been a tenant of the plaintiff and his three brothers in respect of the second floor of premise no. 25a, Raj Chandra Sen. Lane The case of the plaintiff is that the said premises has since been partitioned between him and his brothers by a deed of partition dated December 16, 1970. Under this partition the portion marked 'c' in the plaint annexed to the deed of partition, fell to the share of the plaintiff. The tenancy of the defendant in respect of the second floor is also in clouded in this plan. Since the partition, the defendant became a tenant under the plaintiff exclusively and the defendant had been paying rent to the plaintiff alone. The plaintiff has been residing in premises No. 28b, Raj Chandra sen Lane, which belongs to his brother kanai Lai, as his licensee. It has been alleged that in allotment 'c' which has fallen to his share, there is no staircase leading from the first floor 10 the second floor. 'the defendant has been going to the second floor through another stair case, which has fallen to the share of another brother. In the partition deed, it has been provided that the defendant would be allowed to use the aforesaid staircase upto March 31, 1972. In order to make the second floor habitable, the plaintiff claims that he has to construct a staircase from the first to the second floor of the said premises. Accordingly, the plaintiff claims that he requires the suit premises for the purposes of building and re-building and also for his own. occupation. The plaintiff determined. the tenancy of the defendant by the; service of a notice to quit. But the; defendant not having vacated the suit premises, the present suit has been filed by the plaintiff.
(3.) THE defendant has contested the suit by filing a written statement. It has been contended by her that the suit is barred by the provisions of sub-section (2a) of Section 13 of the West Bengal premises Tenancy Act, 1956. She has denied that the plaintiff requires the suit premises for his own occupation or for the purposes of building a staircase, as alleged.