Renewal of a lease is a fresh lease and not an extension of the original lease, and the status of the tenancy is determined based on the renewed lease.

L. M. Ghosh, J.

The decision of this second appeal depends upon a decision of a short but crucial point whether the tenancy in question should be governed by the Transfer of Property Act or by the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956.

2. There was a lease of the suit premises for a period of ten years, expiring on the 31st of January, 1957. The defendant was a lessee by the original lease. In the original lease deed, there was a clause for renewal of the lease for a further period of ten years. It was stated that the defendant in due course, exercised the option of renewal and thus the lease stood extended for a further period of 10 years expiring on the 31st of January, 1967. It is of course an admitted case that no separate lease was executed for the extended period. The plaintiffs filed the suit on the ground of expiry of the extended period of the lease after its renewal. It was also pleaded in the plaint that the suit premises were required by the landlords for building and rebuilding. A notice of eviction was also alluded to in the plaint.

3. The defence contention was that the tenancy in his favour was continuing and operative. That the plaintiff, required the suit premises on the ground of building and rebuilding was also repudiated.

4. The learned Subordinate Judge did not accept the case of the plaintiff; as regards reasonable requirement for the purpose of building and rebuilding. But he held that the tenancy in question was governed by the T.P. Act and by efflux of time, the tenancy stood determined. On that finding, he granted decree for recovery of possession.

5. On an appeal from that judgment and decree before the District Judge, the mailer came up for disposal by the learned 3rd Court of the Additional District Judge, Alipore. The learned Additional District Judge, disposing of the first appeal, accepted the finding of the trial court that the plaintiff failed to establish their alleged requirement of the suit premises for the purpose of building or rebuilding He, however, was of the view that the tenancy in question come to be governed by the W.B.P.T. Act and so the same could not come to an end by efflux of time merely. As according to the learned Additional District Judge, the tenancy was governed by the W.B.P.T Act and as the ground of requirement for building and rebuilding was not established, the learned Additional District Judge allowed the appeal and dismissed the suit. The cross-objection filed by the plaintiffs against the finding of want of reasonable requirement was dismissed.

6. This second appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree of the learned Additional District Judge, dismissing-the plaintiffs' suit.

7. It is clear that the only point that survives for consideration in this appeal is whether the tenancy is governed by the T.P. Act or by the W B.P.T. Act. It is concluded by concurrent findings of fact, based on sound materials, that the plaintiffs could not prove the ground of requirement for building and rebuilding. So that, if the tenancy be governed by the P. T. Act, the suit must fail, the only ground within the WBPT Act not having been established. But if, on the other hand, the tenancy be governed by the T. P. Act, the plaintiffs' suit must succeed, as the tenancy must stand determined by efflux of time.

8. Mr. Mukherjee, the learned Advocate for the appellants, has contended strenuously that the tenancy must be governed by the T P. Act, as both the terms of the original lease and the terms of the extended lease by virtue of the renewal clause must be added up. He has cited a number of decisions in support of his contention.

9. Mr. Dasgupta, the learned Advocate appearing for the respondent, has, on the other hand, argued seriously that the tenancy must be governed by the WBPT Act, because the adding up process is not justified. Mr. Dasgupta has also relied upon a number decisions.

10 It would be obvious that if the period for the extended lease be not added to the per