- (1.) This Court has heard the learned Advocates for the respective parties in both the appeals as both the appeals have been heard together. Facts of the case, briefly, are as follows: The plaintiffs-appellants filed a suit (Title Suit No. 282 of 1991) against one Kali Prasad Chowdhury (predecessor-in-interest of the present defendants respondents) praying for a decree for khas possession of the suit premises by evicting the said" defendant and for mesne profits. The said suit was ultimately placed before the learned 5th Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Alipore. In the said suit the plaintiffs-appellants prayed for eviction of the original defendant on several grounds and one of such grounds was that the plaintiffs reasonably require the suit premises for own use and occupation. It is not necessary to discuss the other grounds because the present second appeal has been heard only on the question as to whether the plaintiffs-appellants reasonably require the suit premises. The defendant in the said suit died during the pendency of the suit and the present defendants-respondents were substituted in place and stead of the said defendant. The defendants contested the said suit by filing written statement denying the material allegations made in the plaint and prayed for dismissal of the suit. The said suit came up for hearing when evidence was adduced on behalf of the parties and the learned Trial Court by judgment and decree dated 30th July, 2009 dismissed the said suit.
(2.) Challenging such judgment and decree passed by the learned Trial Court, the plaintiffs-appellants filed Title Appeal No. 267 of 2009 which was placed before the learned 3rd Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Alipore and the learned First Appellate Court allowed the said Title Appeal in part and set aside the judgment and decree passed by the learned Trial Court. The learned First Appellate Court granted a decree for partial eviction in favour of the plaintiffs-appellants and the defendants-respondents were directed to vacate and deliver one room out of the suit premises in favour of the plaintiffs. It may be noted here that the learned Trial Court had passed the said judgment and decree on 30th July, 2009 in Title Suit No. 304/282 of 1991 and the learned First Appellate Court passed a judgment and decree on 8th September, 2010 in Title Appeal No. 267 of 2009.
(3.) Challenging the said judgment and decree passed by the learned First Appellate Court, the plaintiffs preferred the Second Appeal being S.A. 88 of 2011 and the defendants preferred S.A.T. 47 of 2011.;