( 1 ) THE plaintiff and the defendant arc both firms. The defendant was a monthly tenant under the plaintiff in respect of a godown at 45-A, Adya Sradh Ghat Road, Calcutta at Rs. 132-8-0 per month in accordance with the English calendar. The plaintiff required the disputed godown for its own use and occupation and accordingly the plaintiff determined the defendant's tenancy by service of notice to quit requiring the defendant to vacate the godown with the expiry of the last day of August, 1954. The defendant failed to vacate and hence the plaintiff filed the suit for ejectment. The defendant contested the suit. Its defence was that the notice was not legal or valid and that the plaintiff did not reasonably require the godown for its own use and occupation. Both the courts have concurrently found that the notice to quit was legal and valid and that the plaintiff reasonably required the godown for its own use and occupation. The suit was, therefore, decreed. Mr. Janah submits that the courts below should not have held that the plaintiff reasonably required the godown for its awn use and occupation. This is a pure question of fact and both the courts have concurrently