A landlord may amend grounds for eviction of a tenant, including reasonable requirement, even post-moratorium, as long as one ground is proven to validate the eviction decree.

JUDGMENT :

(Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.)

1. This second appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree dated 03.11.2011 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 9th court at Alipore in Title Appeal No. 123 of 2010. By the impugned judgment the learned Court below affirmed the judgment and decree dated 09.04.2010 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) 1st Court, Alipore, in Title Suit No. 28 of 2005.

2. Brief background of the present case is that initially Plaintiff/Respondent herein filed a suit for eviction of the Defendant/ appellant herein on the ground of default on 05.04.1991. During pendency of the said suit an application for amendment, of plaint was filed on 07.11.2000 and by the said amendment grounds of building and rebuilding and reasonable requirement was incorporated in the plaint, alleging that in order to fulfil plaintiffs requirement the suit premises has to be reconstructed. The defendant/appellant herein contested the said suit but said suit was dismissed by the Trial Court with the observation that the plaintiff could not prove his case beyond reasonable doubt and on the contrary defendant is entitled to get protection under section 17(4) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy act 1956( Act of 1956) on the ground that the defendant complied with the order passed under section 17(2) of the said Act.

3. The plaintiff/respondent herein being aggrieved by that judgment and decree preferred an appeal before the appellant court being Title Appeal No. 23 of 2006 and learned Appellate court has been pleased to set aside the judgment and decree passed by the learned Trial court and remanded the suit to the Trial court for fresh disposal in the light of the observation made in the body of the judgment, in accordance with law.

4. The defendants/appellants thereafter preferred a first miscellaneous appeal being no. FMAT 2948 of 2007 against the aforesaid judgment of remand dated 31.07.2007 before this Court. However the said appeal was thereafter dismissed for being not pressed by the defendants/appellants.

5. Thereafter the original suit being Title Suit No. 28 of 2005 was heard as remanded and the Trial Court after hearing afresh decreed the suit on the ground of reasonable requirements under section 13(1) (ff) of the Act of 1956. However the learned Trial Court disbelieved the plaintiffs/respondents case for requirements of his business and as such refused to grant decree on the ground of building rebuilding under section 13(1) (f) of the Act of 1956.

6. Being aggrieved by that order passed by the Trial court the defendants /tenants preferred an appeal before the court below i.e. first appellate court and the same was renumbered as Title Appeal No. 123 of 2010. Ld. Court below by its order dated 3rd November, 2011 was pleased to dismiss the said appeal with the observation that the plaintiff has succeeded in proving his case of building and rebuilding under section 13(1) (f) and also the ground of reasonable requirement under section 13(1) (ff) and as such plaintiff is entitled to get decree of eviction on both the grounds.

7. Being aggrieved by said judgment and decree the defendants/tenants filed the present second appeal and while admitting the second appeal the Division Bench of this court by its order dated 21.03.2012 has been pleased to formulate following substantial question of law:-

Whether the ld. Court of appeal below committed substantial error of law by reversing the finding of the ld. Trial judge with regard to the ground of building and rebuilding as enumerated in section 13(1) (f) read with section 18A of the west Bengal Premises Tenancy Act 1956.

8. While adjudicating the issue of building and rebuilding as well as reasonable requirement of the suit premises by the plaintiff, th