- (1.) This appeal would relate to a decree of eviction passed by the learned Single Judge as against the appellant in respect of the premises No. 8 Short Street Calcutta belonging to the respondent.
(2.) The facts would depict, the parties entered into a development agreement on December 23, 1987 by which the respondent permitted the appellant to develop the property situated at No. 8 Short Street Calcutta comprising of an area measuring about 23 cottahs 10 chattacks 40 square feet consisting of two old buildings, one being a two storied building in which the respondent was residing in the first floor. Under the agreement the respondent would hand over vacant possession of the premises in question to the appellant and the appellant would develop the said property by taking all necessary steps in this regard. As and by way of part performance, the respondent handed over the ground floor of the second storied building to the appellant. Under the agreement the appellant was to arrange for alternative accommodation of the occupants including the respondent simultaneously on handing over of the entire vacant premises. The respondent alleged, despite handing over of the ground floor portion to the appellant the appellant took no step to develop the property. Hence they were liable to vacate the said premises. The appellant resisted the action on the ground, they were monthly tenant under the respondent at a sum of rupees five thousand per month. So long rents were payable they were entitled to retain possession and the suit was liable to be dismissed.
(3.) The learned Single Judge rejected the contention of the respondent.;