CHAMPA KHANNA Vs. TEJMAL CHOUDHURY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal has been filed against the appellate decree passed by learned Assistant District Judge, Second Court, Alipore, in Title Appeal No. 102 of 1992, affirming the judgment and decree passed in Second Munsiff, Alipore, in Title Suit No. 397 of 1988.

(2.) The plaintiff/ appellant filed a suit for ejectment against the respondent. The plaintiff claimed ejectment from the premises in suit (House No. 83/3, Ballygunge Place) on the ground of bona fide required for self occupation. It was contended that the appellants are presently residing at Premises No. 83/2, Ballygunge Place, Calcutta, which is owned by the uncle of plaintiff No. 2. The plaintiffs are licensees in that premises and are suffering from shortage of space. Plaintiffs have no other reasonably suitable accommodation. The tenancy of the defendant was determined by a notice dated 4th June, 1988 but the defendant failed to vacate the premises. Hence the suit.

(3.) Defendant himself did not sign and verify the written statement but it has been done by his constituted Attorney Shri Sushil Chowdhury. According to written statement, the plaintiffs' ownership to the suit premises was denied. It was alleged that the adjacent house being premises No. 83/2, Ballygunge Place belongs to plaintiffs that plaintiffs do not require the suit premises for their occupation.