NISIKANTA ROY CHOWDHURY Vs. BHARATI PAUL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - The Present appeal, directed against an order of remand passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, 5th Court, Alipore on 5-9-1979 in Title Appeal No 1001 of 1978, raises a short but interesting question of law The tenant defendant is the appellant in the present appeal.

(2.) The landlord-plaintiff, who is the respondent here, instituted a suit for eviction, inter alia on the ground of default and reasonable requirement for use and occupation. The ground of default ultimately became ineffective in view of provisions of Section 17(4) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, As far as the case of reasonable requirement as concerned the plaintiff pleaded that as her husband's retirement was imminent, the quarter provided by his employer was to be vacated. Her children. had to carry on their studies by residing in the premises of her relations. In evidence it transpired that retirement of the plaintiff's husband had occurred, two daughters got married and the son got admitted in the Bachelor of Science Course of the Benaras University. The ground of reasonable requirement also proved abortive as the trial court dismissed the suit, upon ending that the alleged letter of the employer (Ex.-7)' and the reply thereto (Ex.-6) bad not been-properly protect nor in the Plaint was there any averment to the infect that the plaintiff had no mutable accommodation other than the suit premises. An appeal berg taken on behalf of the plaintiff the lower appellate court by the impugned order of remand sent the suit back to the Trial Court with a direct on for framing an additional issue regarding the availability of other reasonably suitable accommodation to the plaintiff after giving the parties opportunities to amend their respective plead in and to adduce evidence on that point. The Lower Appellate Court, however, did not investigate or adjudicate the property of the other findings of the Trial Court.

(3.) There is no appeal by the plaintiff but the present appeal, as stated hereinabove, is at the instance of the defendant.