BINAPANI SARKAR Vs. INDERDEO SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal by the plaintiff arises out of a suit for eviction of the defendant-respondent from a house on holding No. 140, Ward No. 9 in the city of Patria. The eviction was claimed on the grounds of personal necessity, sub-letting of the rooms of the house by the respondent to persons suffering from diseases like tuberculosis and cancer and denial of the appellant's title by the respondent.

(2.) The defence was that the appellant had no personal necessity for the house, the house was never sub-let to persons suffering from diseases or anyone there was no denial of the appellant's title by the respondent. A plea was also taken that no valid notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act was given to the respondent,

(3.) The trial Court found that a valid notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act was served on the respondent, there was no denial of the appellant's till by the respondent and the appellant had no personal necessity for the house. It, however, found that the respondent had sub-let rooms of the house to persons suffering from diseases and decreed the suit. On appeal, the lower appellate Court confirmed the findings of the trial Court on the questions of notice, denial of title and personal necessity. It reversed the finding of the trial Court on the question of sub-letting and allowed the appeal and dismissed the suit.