CHITTARANJAN PAL Vs. BANKIM CHANDRA BISWAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - This second appeal has been preferred by the defendants being the appellants herein challenging the judgment and decree dated 20.9.2000 and 30.9.2000 respectively passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) 1st Court at Ranaghat, Nadia, in Title Appeal No. 15 of 1997 affirming the judgment and decree dated 30.05.1997 and 03.06.1997 respectively by the learned Munsif, 2nd Court at Ranaghat, Nadia in T.S. No. 37 of 1996 (originally T.S. No. 213 of 1991).

(2.) The case as has been made out by the plaintiffs Kamala Bala Biswas in the plaint is inter alia as follows: The defendant Chittaranjan Pal is a tenant under the plaintiff Kamala Biswas in pursuance of a Written Agreement at a monthly rental of Rs. 20/- payable according to Bengali calendar by the first of the month following the month for which rent relates. The defendant is a defaulter since Kartick 1393 B.S. The plaintiff resides in holding No. 34 which consists of two bed rooms. There is no kitchen. A portion of verandah is covered and is being used as store room and remaining portion of verandah is used as kitchen. There is a Thakur Ghar covered with asbestos measuring 8' x 6'. The plaintiff is the owner of three holdings. One comprising of two bed rooms occupied by the plaintiff. The other holding being No. 36 consists of one bed room occupied by tenant Kala Chand Sarkar and another holding being No. 35 consists of a single room occupied by defendant. The plaintiff has a family of six members consisting of herself, her son, son's wife, one grand daughter aged 30 and 22 years and one grandson residing with plaintiff as a member of her family since he was eight months old and his mother being expired his father married for second time.

(3.) The plaintiff requires two more bed rooms apart from bed rooms which are in her possession and a kitchen and the suit premises is required for her own use and occupation. The plaintiff has no other suitable alternative accommodation. The husband of plaintiff is a co-owner of a premises three miles away and wholly occupied by co-owners. The plaintiff has been residing at Ranaghat from 1956 for her health, education and other civic comfort. Plaintiff is suffering from her trouble and a separate room and constant treatment at Ranaghat is necessary. The plaintiff is owner of three holdings, and one holding comprises two rooms which is occupied by plaintiff. The other is holding No. 36 which consisting of one bed room only occupied by tenant Tarachand Sarkar and another holding No. 35 consisting of a single room occupied by the defendant according to the plaintiff notice under section 13(6) of West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act was served through learned advocate and the cause of action for suit arose on 8.8.1989 at Ranaghat. The plaintiff prayed for decree for eviction of the defendant from the suit premises and decree for preliminary and final mesne profit and decree for cost and also for any other relief which the plaintiff is entitled to in law.