A tenant is not liable to be evicted on the ground of structural alterations unless the structure raised is a permanent structure or material alteration to the property.

L.M Ghosh, J. The plaintiff filed an ejectment suit against the defendants on the grounds of default and conversion of the property. The defendants are the legal representatives of Late Tjlak Chand Arora. It was an admitted position that Late Tilak Chand Arora was a monthly tenant under the plaintiff at a monthly rent of Rs. 105/- per month. There was some controversy as to when •the rent was payable as per the contract of tenancy. Tilak Chand Arora died, leaving the defendants as his heirs. Thus the defendants became the tenants of the plaintiff. It was alleged that during the life time of Tilak Chand Arora, he without the consent of the plaintiff, covered the open varandah running from the covered varandah in front of the two bed rooms and began to use the same as a room. By subsequent amendment, the plaintiff also pleaded that the defendants raised partition walls by brick walls in the two rooms on the second floor of the premises, which were let out to Tllak Chand Arora. Then, the ground of default from January, 1980 was also pleaded. The plaintiff submitted that the tenancy of the defendants was terminated by a notice to quit served on them on 26.6.80 by registered post. As the defendants did not vacate, the suit for ejectment was filed. The plaintiff also mentioned that she reserved the right to file a separate suit for damages caused to her by covering the varandah.

2. The defendants submitted that there was no alteration in the suit property. It was denied that Tilak Chand Arora covered the open varandah. There was some controversy raised as to whether the covered varandah was included in their tenancy or whether they merely had permissive right in respect thereof. The defendants pointed out that Tilak Chand Arora was Inducted in the suit premises not by the plaintiff, but by one Sohan Devi Kothari. As regards the alleged constructions inside the two rooms, the defendants took a firm stand that all along there were partition walls on the back side of the two rooms. In short, the defendants denied that there was any material alteration or structural change.

3. The learned Judge, City Civil Court, Calcutta, decreed the suit on the ground of material alteration or conversion of the suit property. As regards the ground of default, the learned trial court held that the defendants were entitled to protection under the statute.

4. The defendants have preferred this appeal against the decree of the learned trial court.

5. It has become clear that the only point for consideration in this appeal is whether the defendants are liable to be evicted on the ground of structural alterations, as it has already been decided that the defendants are entitled to get protection against eviction on the ground of default. This allegation of structural alteration consists of two parts, the first part is covering the open varandah, running from the covered varandah in front of the two rooms of the suit premises, the second part is relating to the allegation that the defendants raised partition walls by bricks in the two rooms.

6. We would first come to the allegation regarding raising partition walls in the two rooms.

7. According to the plaintiff, though two rooms were let out, the defendants or their predecessor converted the two rooms into four by raising two partition walls.

8. Mr. Dasgupta, the learned Advocate for the appellants/defendants, has submitted that when the entire evidence, including the report of the Commissioner appointed by this Court is considered, there would be no doubt that the rooms are in the same position as before. Mr. R.G. Ram, the learned advocate appearing for the respondent, has referred to certain materials for his contention that originally, (here were two rooms, but sometime later after induction, the two rooms were converted into four rooms by raising partition walls. He has first referred to Exts. A Series for demonstrating that only two rooms were let out. Ext. A Series are the rent receipts in the name o