P.N.Mookerjee, J. - (1.) This appeal is by the defendant and it arises out of a suit for eviction, brought by the respondent landlord on the ground of reasonable requirement of the disputed premises for his own occupation, as contemplated under Section 13(1)(f) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956.
(2.) The suit was brought on 28th February 1959, and, admittedly, it was governed by the above Act. There was the usual notice, purporting to be in compliance with Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act and also of Section 13(6) of the above West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956. The suit was decreed by the learned trial Judge upon the finding that the notice was valid and, further that the case of reasonable requirement of the disputed premises for the plaintiff's own occupation had been amply made out. These findings were affirmed by the lower appellate Court which dismissed the defendant's appeal. Thereafter, the present second appeal was taken to this Court by the unsuccessful defendant.
(3.) The two points, which have been urged by Mr. Das Gupta in support of this appeal, are (1) that, however, valid the notice may be under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, it is not in compliance with Section 13(6) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956, as, according to Mr. Das Gupta, it is not a notice of suit, either expressly or by necessary implication; and 92) that, on the evidence before the Court and on the materials on record, no case of reasonable requirement, as contemplated in Section 13 (1)(f) of the above Act, has been made out by the plaintiff.;