An eviction suit filed by a thika tenant for evicting a Bharatia lies before the Controller appointed under the West Bengal Thika Tenancy (Acquisition and Regulation) Act, 2001, and not before the Civil Court.

Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J.

This second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 30th October, 2014 passed by the Learned Judge, 5th Bench, City Civil Court, Calcutta in Title Appeal No. 20 of 2012 setting aside the judgment and decree dated 2nd December, 2011 passed by the Learned Judge, 3rd Bench, Small Causes Court at Calcutta in Ejectment Suit No. 321 of 2005-C, at the instance of the plaintiffs/appellants.

2. Let us now consider as to whether any substantial question of law is involved in this appeal for which the appeal is required to be admitted under the provision of Order 41, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, or not.

3. Here is the case where we find that the plaintiffs filed a suit for eviction against the defendant on the ground of default in payment of rent as well as for their own use and occupation. The defendant appeared in the said suit and contested the same by filing written statement denying allegation made out in the plaint. Several issues were framed in the said suit. Parties led evidence in support of their respective claim in the said suit.

4. The learned Judge after considering the pleadings of the parties and their evidence was pleased to decree the said suit on contest. The decree for eviction was granted on the ground of reasonable requirement of the plaintiffs. The learned Judge refused to pass any decree for eviction on the ground of default as the learned Trial Judge held that the defendant is entitled to get the protection under Section 7(4) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act.

5. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said judgment and decree of the learned Trial Judge, the defendant/respondent preferred an appeal before the learned Appeal Court.

6. The learned Appeal Court reversed the said judgment and decree of the learned Judge and allowed the appeal. The learned Appeal Court held that the suit was not maintainable before the forum where the suit was filed by the plaintiffs because of inherent lack of jurisdiction of this Court to entertain such suit. Such conclusion was drawn by the Appeal Court by considering the evidence of the plaintiffs’ witness being P.W. 1 who admitted that the property where the tenancy was created is a thika tenanted property and the tenant is a Bharatia under the Thika tenant. The sale deed being Ext.3 also shows that the plaintiffs purchased the hut from the erstwhile owner thereof. Various other documents including the rent receipts were also considered by the learned Appeal Court for drawing such conclusion that the suit premises is a thika tenanted property and the plaintiffs are the thika tenants and the defendant is a Bharatia under the thika tenant.

7. The learned Appeal Court also held that the plaintiffs have failed to prove that they reasonably required the suit premises for their own use and occupation. Thus, the decree for eviction which was passed by the learned Trial Judge, was set aside and the appeal was allowed.

8. The instant second appeal is directed against the said judgment and decree of the learned Appeal Court. The legality of the impugned judgment is now under our scrutiny in this appeal.

9. Let us now consider as to how far the learned Appeal Court was justified in coming to the conclusion that the suit was not maintainable before the forum where it was filed by the plaintiffs.

10. The instant suit for eviction was filed sometime in the year 2005. The West Bengal Thika Tenancy (Acquisition and Regulation) Act, 2001 came into operation on 22nd November, 2002.

11. Sub-section 3 of Section 8 of the said Act provides that any dispute regarding payment of rent by the thika tenant to the State Government or by a Bharatia to a thika tenant, or any case of eviction of Bharatia, shall be disposed of by the Controller in such manner as may be prescribed.

12. The Controller has also been defined in Section 2(2) of the said Act which provides that ‘Controller’ means an officer appointed under Section 9 and includes an Addit