MADHURESH PRASAD,J. - (1.)The appellant was the plaintiff in a suit for ejectment. The eviction was sought on the ground of reasonable requirement and on the ground of default. The trial court decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff directing the defendant therein to deliver khas possession to the plaintiff failing which the plaintiff was granted liberty to get the decree executed through the court.
(2.)The tenant being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the decree preferred the instant appeal. The first appellate court namely, the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track 2nd Court, Sealdah, had allowed the appeal of the tenants setting aside the decree pronounced by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Additional Court, Sealdah. The same is the subject-matter of the present appeal at the instance of the plaintiff/landlord.
(3.)The brief factual matrix of the case is that the tenants were occupying an asbestos shed pucca room in the first floor with common bath and privy being the suit premises. The same was possessed by the defendants in the capacity of a tenant at a monthly rental value of Rs.199.50. It is the case of the plaintiff that the tenancy was determined on the 1st day of August, 2004 by virtue of a notice under Sec. 6(4) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The tenancy was thus determined. Thereafter, it is the case of the plaintiff that the defendants continued as a trespasser, having failed to vacate the possession in spite of notice of determination of tenancy. The plaintiff also asserted that the defendants were the defaulter of rent since September, 2003. The plaintiff further asserted that the premises in question was reasonably required by her for her own use and for the use of her family members and that she had no other alternative accommodation.