BABY MUHURI Vs. ANIMA GHOSH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the Courts have decided the case against the appellant/defendant.

(2.) This appellant/defendant is a tenant in respect of a shop room under the plaintiff/respondent for a monthly rent of Rs.265.00. The plaintiff/respondent runs a ceremonial house in the suit building and she requires the suit room for her own use and occupation as the said ceremonial house runs without any effective office room and for such reason she is facing difficulty in scaling the business. The plaintiff/respondent requested the defendant/appellant to vacate the tenanted shop room but she did not vacate the suit premises even after receipt of notice. Finding no other alternative the plaintiff/respondent instituted a suit before the Trial Court with a prayer for eviction of the appellant/defendant from the suit premises. It is specifically contended by the plaintiff/respondent that the said tenanted shop room is reasonably required by her for running ceremonial house situates in the suit premises.

(3.) Defendant appeared before the Trial Court and contested the suit by filing written statement denying all the allegations as stated by the plaintiff. It is the specific case of the defendant that there are other vacant shop rooms in the ground floor of the premises but the suit has been instituted by the plaintiff with an ulterior motive and for evicting her from the suit room. It is further averred by the defendant that the notice served to him in connection with this case is bad in law and it was not properly served to terminate the tenancy. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the suit was decreed only on the ground of reasonable requirement without any recourse of any local inspection of the suit property and as such it cannot be said that the said tenanted room is reasonably required by the plaintiff/respondent.