Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J. - (1.) This Second Appeal is directed against the judgement and decree dated 23rd December, 2015 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 2nd Court at Hooghly, in Title Appeal No. 34 of 2014 affirming the judgement and decree dated 27th March, 2014 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Additional Court at Hooghly, in Title Suit No. 36 of 2009 at the instance of the defendant/appellant.
(2.) Let us now consider as to whether any substantial question of law is involved in this appeal for which the appeal is required to be admitted for hearing under the provision of Order 41, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(3.) The plaintiff filed a suit for eviction against the defendant/appellant on termination of relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties by service of notice under section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. Since the defendant did not vacate the suit premises after expiry of the notice period, the instant suit was filed. The defendant appeared in the said suit and contested the same by filing written statement denying the allegations made out by the plaintiff in the plaint. It was contended by the defendant that the tenancy of the defendant is governed by the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997. As such, the defendant claimed that the present suit is not maintainable as the said suit was filed without complying with the statutory requirement of the said Act. Both the courts below rejected such contention of the defendant/appellant. Both the courts below held that the tenancy of the defendant/appellant is governed by the Transfer of Property Act. Both the courts below also found that the notice under section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act was duly served upon the defendant and the said notice was good, legal, valid and sufficient. As such, the learned Trial Court passed a decree for eviction against the defendant. The learned First Appellate Court affirmed the said decree for eviction passed by the learned Trial Court.;