Debangsu Basak, J.

A tenant assailed a judgment of affirmation of a decree of eviction against him in the present second appeal.

The respondent filed a suit for eviction of the appellant on the ground of reasonable requirement. Six issues were framed for trial. The appellant contended that the notice to quit was not received by him. Moreover, the suit property was not reasonably required by the respondent.

The second appeal was admitted by an order dated January 16, 2006 and was directed to be heard on the following substantial question of law:-

1. Whether the learned court of appeal below committed substantial error of law in rejecting an application for amendment of written statement filed by the appellant during the pendency of the appeal alleging that during the pendency of such appeal the plaintiff-respondent constructed two further spacious rooms.

It was contended on behalf of the appellant that, the suit premises was not reasonably required by the respondent. In order to establish that the suit premises were not reasonably required, the appellant wanted to amend its written statement and applied for the same before the First Appellate Court. The First Appellate Co