Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

c. Decree of eviction of the defendants from the erstwhile tenancy held by late Jyotindra Nath Das described in Schedule 'B' hereunder including all persons claiming through, by or under the defendants and obtaining vacate and khas possession thereof. .... "

2. The plaint case of the said suit, in short is thus, the father of the defendants Jyotindra Nath Das was the original tenant of the suit property, on his death the said tenancy devolved upon his widow Laxmipriya Das who also died in December, 2012 and on her death the said tenancy was extinguished since the other heirs of the said original tenant are not coming within the definition of tenant under Section 2(g) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as the 'said Act of 1997'). The defendants are therefore, possessing the suit property as trespassers. The plaintiff, through its learned advocate served notice dated January 21, 2013 asking the defendants to quit and vacate the suit property but they failed to comply with it, hence the suit.

10. Mr. Nirmalya Dasgupta, learned advocate for the respondents on the other hand submits that the appeal Court below is right in holding that the subject tenancy since was devolved upon the defendants under the said Act of 1956, the suit cannot be decreed on admission on the basis of the definition of 'tenant' under Section 2(g) of the said Act of 1997. He refers to the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of TEXTILE ASSOCIATION (INDIA) BOMBAY UNIT vs. BALMOHAN GOPAL KURUP AND ANOTHER reported in AIR 1990 SUPREME COURT 2053 and the decision of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of JAHARLAL SAHA & OTHERS vs. PRADIP SAHA & OTHERS reported in 2006 (1) CHN 515 to contend that the heirs of the deceased tenant are necessary parties in a suit for eviction.