KAMALA KANT ROY Vs. RADHESHYAM AGARWALLA & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant approached this Court in this appeal impugning eviction decree passed against her in the capacity of the Secretary of an unregistered association and/or body of the Managing Committee of Sri Basistha Bal Vidyalaya. The eviction suit was filed by the respondent No.1 in the capacity of the sole executor to the estate of late Suraj Bai. The suit was filed originally on the ground of default in paying monthly rent by the tenant to the landlord and reasonable requirement. Following determination of tenancy under Sec. 13(6) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956 the suit was filed. Subsequently on the changed circumstances the plaint was amended by adding additional grounds relating to illegal transfer and/or sub-letting and/or assignment of the suit premises and also for unauthorised and masonary construction in contravention of clauses (m), (o) and (p) of Sec. 108 of the Transfer of Property Act. In the plaint it was stated that the tenancy was granted in the name of the said school which was and still is being run and/or managed and/or administered by an unregistered association consisting of several members and secretary thereof. Since the said association is an unregistered and fluctuating body and consisting of numerous unidentified persons, the plaintiff filed the aforesaid suit after obtaining leave under Order 1 Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure. It appears from the records that leave under Order 1 Rule 8 of the C.P.C., was granted and an advertisement was issued in the daily newspaper "Biswamitra". Having noticed such advertisement and/or public notice the appellant before us made an application for adding herself as a party defendant and such addition was allowed. Thereafter none appeared to contest the said suit excepting the appellant. It further appears from the records that the present appellant made an application under Sec. 17 (2A) (b) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956. Subsequently the said application was dismissed on contest and the said order of dismissal was not challenged before any higher forum.

(2.) The appellant before us filed her written statement to contest the suit claiming herself to be the present secretary of the said unregistered association. In the written statement she took a plea to the effect that school being an admitted tenant has not been served with the eviction notice nor the school has been made a party to the suit. As there is no lawful determination of the tenancy upon service of the above notice on the school being the recorded tenant, the suit is not maintainable. In the written statement the ground of default in paying rent has not been denied rather it has been by necessary implication admitted. The other grounds, viz. reasonable requirement, sub-letting and illegal construction have, however, been denied. A specific plea, taken as to the locus standi of the respondent-plaintiff to file the suit as an executor seeking for eviction on the ground of reasonable requirement. It was alleged that the executor not being an owner cannot claim decree for eviction on the ground of reasonable requirement.

(3.) On the above backgrounds, the learned Trial Judge after having witness action, and appreciation and analysis of evidence passed a decree for eviction on all the grounds and the learned Trial Judge negatived all the contentions raised by the defendant.