ALI ABBASUDDIN Vs. BAIDYANATH MONDAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Though it is reported by the Stamp Reporter that the appeal was filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation, but we find on calculation of the period spent by the appellant for obtaining the certified copy of the impugned judgement and decree that the appeal was filed within the prescribed period of limitation. Hence, we ignore the report of the Stamp Reporter on limitation.

(2.) Let us now consider as to whether any substantial question of law is involved in this appeal for which the appeal is required to be admitted for hearing under the provision of Order XLI Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure or not. This is a suit for eviction of a tenant whose tenancy, according to the plaintiff, is governed by the Transfer of Property Act. Since the defendant/appellant did not vacate the suit premises on termination of his tenancy by notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, the plaintiff/respondent has filed the suit for eviction against him.

(3.) The defendant/appellant contested the said suit by filing written statement taking various pleas including the plea of non-service of notice of Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. The defendant/appellant has also contended that since the tenancy agreement was not registered one, his tenancy cannot be governed by the terms of the said agreement.