Amiya Kumar Mookerji, J. - (1.)These three appeals are by the plaintiff-landlord arising out of ejectment suits under Clause (h) of the proviso to Section 12 (1) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act. 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') viz., that the premises is reasonably required by the landlord for the purpose of building and rebuilding plaintiff's case, in substance, was that the premises No. 1/29/1, Bowbazar Street, originally belonged to one Prafulla Bhar, but subsequently he leased out the same to the plaintiff, a partnership firm for 99 years. The plaintiff became lessee of the premises by a registered lease dated 8-10-1953. The defendants became tenants under the plaintiff by reason of the aforesaid lease. The plaintiff required the suit premises for the purpose of building and rebuilding and also under the terms of the said lease. The tenancy of the defendants had been determined by notice to quit but as the defendants did not vacate the premises, the plaintiff brought the above suits.
(2.)The defence in all the suits was, the denial of the plaintiff's requirement of different premises for building and rebuilding. The validity of the notice to quit was also challenged.
(3.)The trial Court decreed the plaintiff's suits upon the findings that the element of necessity for requirement of the different suit premises by the plaintiff for the purpose of building and rebuilding and its reasonableness have been made out. The proposed construction would not lead to diminish accommodation or any public disadvantage within the meaning of explanation to Section 12 (1) of the Act; all the tenancy had been validly determined by notice to Quit.