JYOTIRMAY BHATTACHARYA, J. - (1.) THIS appeal will be heard on the following substantial questions of law : - 1. Whether the learned First Appellate Court was justified in entertaining the first appeal which was filed by some of the co - landlords without joining the other co -landlords as party to the appeal though they were impleaded as proforma defendants in the suit ? 2. Whether the learned lower Appellate Court committed a substantial error of law in holding that the learned Trial Court had correctly decided the maintainability of the suit in favour of the plaintiffs, without appreciating that the present suit for eviction of the tenant/defendant no.1/appellant had not been filed by or on behalf of all the joint landlords who had jointly inherited the property form the original landlord of the defendant no. 1/appellant ?
(2.) IMMEDIATELY after we admitted this Second Appeal for hearing under the provision of Order 41 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, we are requested by the learned counsel appearing for the parties to dispose of this appeal on merit. Accordingly, on their prayer, we have decided to hear this appeal on merit by dispensing with the requirement of filing paper books and by treating the appeal as on the day's list.
(3.) LET us now consider the merit of the instant appeal in the facts of the present case with reference to substantial questions of law, formulated by us hereinabove. The plaintiffs/respondents filed a suit for eviction against the defendant/appellant on the ground of default in payment of rent and also for their reasonable requirement. The defendant appeared in the said suit and contested the same by filing written statement. Not only the maintainability of the suit was challenged by the defendant in his written statement, but also the legality and validity of the ejectment notice was also challenged.;