- (1.) This Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated September 23, 2003 and October 28, 2003 respectively passed by the learned Judge, Small Causes Court, Sealdah in Title Appeal No.97 of 2000 thereby affirming the judgment and decree dated April 25, 2000 and April 29, 2000 respectively passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 1 st Court, Sealdah in Title Suit No.361 of 1991. The plaintiff/respondent herein instituted a suit being Title Suit No.361 of 1991 against the defendant/appellant herein for recovery of possession of the suit premises as described in the schedule of the plaint on the ground of reasonable requirement.
(2.) The defendant/appellant herein contested the said suit by filing a written statement denying the material allegations raised in the plaint. Upon analysis of evidence on record, the learned Trial Judge decreed the suit on contest. Being aggrieved, the defendant/tenant preferred an appeal being Title Appeal No.97 of 2000 which was also dismissed on contest thereby affirming the decree of eviction passed by the learned Trial Judge. Being aggrieved, this application has been preferred.
(3.) At the time of admission of the appeal, the following substantial questions of law are framed for decision in this second appeal:- a) Whether the learned court of appeal below committed substantial error of law in not considering the case of partial eviction of the appellant from the suit property when it had come to the conclusion that the plaintiffs were in occupation of four rooms and kitchen; b) Whether the learned court of appeal below committed substantial error of law in holding that the suit was not hit by Section 13(3A) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act. ;