HARIDAS CHOWDHURY Vs. PRITI CHOUDHURI ALIAS PRITIMOYEE CHAUDHURY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) : This is a tenant-defendant's appeal and is directed against the judgment and decree dated 19. 5. 1984, passed by Judge, City Civil Court, Calcutta, Bench 11, in ejectment suit No. 302 of 1980 brought by the plaintiff respondent on the ground of reasonable requirement for her own use and occupation by evicting the tenant-defendant from the suit premises No. 9, D. L. Roy Street, calcutta-6.

(2.) THE case of the plaintiff as made out in the plaint is that she is the owner or land lady of the premises in suit. The defendant was a monthly tenant under the plaintiff in respect of the entire first floor and one room in the ground floor on the southern side of the suit premises at a monthly rental Rs. 160/ -. according to English Calendar month. The tenancy of the defendant was determined by an Advocate's notice dated 2 1st November, 1979 calling upon the defendant to quit and vacate the suit premises on the expiry of the last day of the month of december, 1979, which was duly received by the defendant. Despite the determination of the tenancy by such registered notice the defendant failed and neglected to deliver up vacant and peaceful possession of the tenancy on the expiry of the month of December, 1979. So the plaintiff was compelled to bring the suit as she is in need of this entire accommodation for her own use and occupation as well as for the members of her family.

(3.) THE defendant contested the suit by filing a written statement on 5. 1. 1980 denying all the material allegations of the plaintiff. The defendant denied categorically the plaintiff's case of reasonable requirement for her own use and occupation and the members of her family. Asserting that there was no genuine requirement at all and that the 'plaintiff brought the suit motivated by the greed to let out the suit premises at a higher rate of rent: and at a premium if she succeeded somehow in evicting the defendant from the same. The notice determining the tenancy was also challenged to be invalid, insufficient and illegal.