Manoj Kumar Mukherji, J. - (1.) This appeal and the cross-objection arise out of a suit for eviction.
(2.) The plaintiff's case is that the defendant was a monthly tenant in respect of the suit premises under him at a monthly rental of Rs. 250/- payable according to English Calendar. The defendant failed and neglected to pay rents since the month of November, 1955 and thus became a defaulter under Clause (1) of sub-section(1) of section 13 of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by which the tenancy was governed. The defendant made unauthorised construction in the tenanted premises without his consent and acted contrary to the provisions of clauses (m), (o) and (p) of section 108 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 thereby making itself liable for eviction on the grounds referred to in Clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 13 of rho Act. By a combined notice to quit and of suit the tenancy of the defendant was duly terminated with the expiry of the month of October, 1959 but it failed to act in terms thereof.
(3.) In resisting the suit the defendant contended that the monthly rent was not Rs. 250/- and the description of the tenancy. In the notice to quit and of suit was not correct. The defendant asserted that it had paid to the plaintiff a sum of Rs. 14,274/- and odd during the period from July 15, 1952 to November 11, 1957 by way of advance and as such was not a defaulter. The allegations of commission of acts contrary to the Clauses (m), (o) and (p) of section 108 of the Transfer of Property Act were denied. The maintainability of the suit was also questioned on the ground that the owners of the land on which the suit premises was situate as well as the Receiver appointed by the High Court in respect of the suit premises were not made parties to the suit.;