BISWANATH KARMAKAR Vs. RAMKRISHNA GHOSH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 21stDecember, 2015 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, 3rd Court atHowrah, in title Appeal No. 79 of 2010 affirming the judgment and decree dated3rd March, 2010 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, 1st Court atHowrah, in Title Suit No. 207 of 2014 at the instance of the defendant/appellant.

(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 41 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(3.) Here is the case where we find that the plaintiff/respondent filed a suit foreviction against the defendant/appellant on termination of his tenancy by service of notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. Though the plaintiff stated in the plaint that the defendant is a defaulter in payment of rent, but since in a suit for eviction of the tenant under the Transfer of Property Act, ground of eviction need not be proved by the plaintiff in order toget a decree for eviction against the defendant in such a suit, this Court does not feel any necessity of discussing the issue as to whether the plaintiff hasbeen able to prove the ground of eviction, i.e. default in payment of rent inthe instant case or not.