Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J. - (1.) This first appeal has been preferred by the tenant defendant against the judgment and decree of eviction passed by the learned Judge, City Civil Court. The suit was filed by the present respondent for eviction of the appellant on the ground of default and reasonable requirement. So far the ground of default is concerned, the tenant by complying with the provision contained in Section 17(2) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) got protection under Section 17(4) of the Act.
(2.) The learned Trial Judge granted a decree for eviction on the ground of reasonable requirement only. Being dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment and decree passed by the learned Trial Judge the instant appeal has been preferred by the tenant/defendant. Since the suit was filed in the year 1982, a lot of subsequent events occurred during the pendency of the present proceeding as a result of which four applications for amendment were filed in the Trial Court for incorporating those subsequent events. Even before this Court at the time of hearing of the present appeal, the defendant/appellant filed an application under Order 41 Rule 27 of the code of Civil Procedure for taking note of the fact that during pendency of the instant appeal the landlord has acquired an accommodation which is equivalent to the suit property from another tenant in the ground floor. Although, a written objection has been filed by the plaintiff/respondent against such application, the fact that the present respondent has got exact same accommodation as that of the suit property in the ground floor of the suit building has not been disputed. However, in the written objection the plaintiff/respondent has tried to make a further claim for a bed room for his two children apart from the study room which he claimed in the trial Court.
(3.) After consideration of all the four applications for amendment of plaint and also of the application for taking note of subsequent event which has been filed by the defendant in this Court, we get the following picture of accommodation available to the parties:- (1) Suit property consists of a flat on the 1st floor of premises No. 145C, Aurobindo Sarani consisting of two rooms, a store room, kitchen, bath and privy. (2) A tenanted accommodation of respondent in a room at the ground floor of 129-B Aurobindo Sarand under one Mansa Ram Bhattacharya which is used as Chamber of the respondent. (3) A flat owned by the wife of the respondent in Lake Town which was gifted by the father-in-law of the plaintiff in favour of the wife of the plaintiff and the same is occupied by one Shyamapada Ghosh as tenant. (4) One room in the ground floor of suit building viz. 145C Aurobindo Sarani which the plaintiff got from a tenant who died during the pendency of the suit. (5) One bamboo framed tile shed room and a small privy at the 2nd floor of suit building viz. 145-C Aurobindo Sarani which the .plaintiff got from another tenant during the pendency of the suit. (6) A flat consisting of two rooms, one store room, kitchen, bath and privy on the ground floor of the suit building viz. 145C Aurobindo Sarani, which the appellant has recovered from another tenant during the pendency of the instant appeal. ;