- (1.) Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment dated 16th July, 2008 and decree dated 23rd July, 2008 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Second Court, Krishnanagar, Nadia in Title Appeal No.129 of 2007 affirming the judgment dated 27th July, 2007 and decree dated 8th March, 2007 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Nabadwip, Nadia in Title Suit No.150 of 1993, the defendant/appellant has preferred this second appeal.
(2.) In both the Courts below, the defendant/appellant has lost his case. The facts of the case reveal that a suit for eviction is filed by the plaintiffs who are the owners of the suit property and the defendant is the tenant under the plaintiffs at a rental of Rs. 60/-per month payable according to Bengali calendar month and further the defendant defaulted in payment of rent since Pous 1399 B.S. and is liable to be evicted from the suit premises. It is also stated by the plaintiffs that without the consent of the plaintiffs, the possession of the said premises in suit was handed over by the defendant to one Bablu Das, who was running an electrical goods business in the suit premises and it is contended by the plaintiffs that the defendant sublet the said portion. It is the further case of the plaintiffs that the suit premises are reasonably required by them. On such grounds, notice to quit was served upon the defendant.
(3.) The defendant filed written statement and contested the suit. Following issues were framed by the trial Court: "1. Have the plaintiffs any cause of action to file the suit? 2. Is the suit maintainable in law? 3. Whether any notice u/s 106 of T.P. Act and u/s 13(6) of W.B.P.T. Act was served upon the defendant? If so, whether the same is legal, valid and sufficient? 4. Is the defendant a defaulter? 5. Has the defendant sublet the suit premises as alleged? 6. Whether the defendant is creating a nuisance in the suit premises as alleged? 7. Whether the suit premises are reasonably required by plaintiffs land if they have no suitable accommodation elsewhere? 8. Are the plaintiffs entitled to get the decree as prayed for? 9. To what other relief/reliefs are the plaintiffs entitled? ";