Satyeshwar Roy, J.

Defendant is the appellant. .

2. The respondent filed the suit for eviction of the appellant from a building on the ground that the appellant had defaulted in paying rent from 15.4.1983 to 14.7.1983 (three months), that the respondent required the building for his own use and occupation, that the appellant had committed breach of the terms of tenancy and that the period for which-the building was let out had expired.

3. There was no dispute between the parties that the month was not according to English calender month but it began from 15th of a month and ended on 14th of the next following month. On the point of default, according to the respondent, the rent was neither paid nor validly remitted for three months, i.e, from 15.4.1983 to 14.7.1983. On the point of personal necessity it was stated by the respondent that he was an old man of 85 years and the accommodation was a very small portion of the ground floor, 'which was not" sufficient for his family; and his nephews and nieces are dependent on him. He required the building for him including his nephews and nieces and also for starting a Dharam Sala. So far the' breach of terms of the tenancy was conce