KAMAL KRISHNA DEB Vs. BIRJU KUMVAKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE decision of this action in ejectment, and for mense profits, concerning two plots of land, with an area of 4 cottahs or thereabouts, "in premises No. 292/4/1, Upper Chitpore Road," Calcutta, instiuted on March 2, 1951, turns on the permanency or non-permanency of the tenancy of the defendants. If the defendants' is a permanent tenancy, the suit is bound to fail. If, however, theirs is a monthly tenancy, without more, coming nowhere near a permanent tenancy, as the plaintiffs contend it is, the suit is bound to succeed. That this is the position in facts and at law is agreed to on all hands. Mr. Dey appearing for the plaintiffs, Mr. Sinha appearing for the tenant-defendants, and I view so the crux of this litigation.

(2.) NOW to the case made out in the plaint One Manglu Kumvakar was a monthly tenant, according to the Bengali calendar, of the land in controversy here under Kumar Dhirendra Krishna Deb Bahadur, the second plaintiff of this suit. The terms and conditions of such tenancy were - (1) Manglu would pay rent at the rate of Rs. 10 a month for one plot, rs. 5 a month for the other, and Rs. 6 2 annas each quarter on account of rates to the Corporation of Calcutta. (2) he would use the premises so desmied for the purpose of residence of himself and his family and for no other. (Vide paragraph 1 of the plaint.)

(3.) BY an appropriate notice to quit, dated April 29. 1942, corresponding to baisakh 16. 1349 B. S. , duly served on manglu. Kumar Bahadur, the second plaintiff, determined Manglu's tenancy on the expiry of the month of Jaistha 1349 B. S. Manglu however, defied the notice and continued in occupation as before. Worse, Manglu installed Shiva, a deity, in the demised property, set up a temporary shed for housing the said deity, and converted the land in controversy as a place of worship, to which "members of the Hindu public" had free access.