Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J. - (1.) This second appeals at the instance of a defendant in a suit for eviction of an alleged licensee and is directed against the judgment and decree dated November 16, 1990 passed by the Additional district Judge, 2nd Court, Alipore, District 4 Parganas in title Appeal No. 50 of 1990 thereby affirming those dated July 31, 1989 passed by the Munsif, 4th Court, Alipore in Title suit No. 203 of 1986.
(2.) The respondent herein filed the aforesaid Title Suit No. 203 of 1986 for eviction of the appellant after revocation of the alleged licence. The case made out by the respondent was as follows:- a) The respondent was the owner of premises No. 44/ Harish Chatterjee Street, Calcutta. One Radhyashyam Saha was a thika tenant under the respondent in respect of the aforesaid premises. The respondent got khan possession of the said premises in the year 1953 and thereafter leased out the said premises to one Basanta Kumar Saha for five years on January 6, 1954. The said lease was renewed for another five years. At the time of execution of the first lease, the structure standing thereon was sold to Basanta Kumar. b) The respondent filed a proceeding for eviction against the executor and executrix of Basanta Kumar being Misc. Thika Case No. 76 of 1965 in the 4th Court of Munsif which ended in compromise on August 24, 194. The respondent purchased the structure from Kalitara Saha and Bibhuti Saha, the executrix and executor respectively of Basanta and Bibhuti delivered possession of the portion of the said premises excepting the present suit property. c) The appellant is a brother of Kalitara. The said Kalitara allowed the appellant to use a portion of 44/1 Harish Chatterjee Street which is the subject matter of this suit as a licensee. d) The respondent started an execution case being Misc. Thika Execution Case No. 3 of 1979 for recovery of possession of the portion of 44/1 Harish Chatterjee Street which was not delivered to the respondent as per compromise decree. In the said proceeding the appellant filed application under Section 10 of the Calcutta Thika Tenancy Act for declafation that he was a Bharatia under Kalitara and that after compromise he had become a tenant under West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act. e) After the coming in to force of the Calcutta Thika tenancy (Acquisition and Regulation) Act 1981 the said proceeding abated and the application under section 10 of the Calcutta Thika Tenancy Act was not disposed of. f) The respondent formally revoked the licence granted to the appellant by notice dated May 5, 1986 but inspite of receiving the notice the appellant did not vacate.
(3.) The appellant contensted the aforesaid suit by filing written statement thereby denying the material allegations made in the plant and his defence was inter alia as follows:- a) The appellant was inducted as Bharatia by Kalitara Saha and Bibhuti Saha and he continued to remain as tenant even after the alleged compromise decree. b) The said compromise decree was executed for the purpose of defrauding the appellant. c) After promulgation of Calcutta Thika Tenancy Acquisition and Regulation Act, 1981 he has become a tenant governed by the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act.;