1. - The second appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 24.9.2001 passed by the first appellate court, by which it affirmed the judgment and decree of the trial Court dated 16.1.1999, by which the suit of the respondent-plaintiff for ejectment of the appellant-defendant from the tenanted premises had been decreed.

2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the respondent-plaintiff purchased the tenanted premises in 1978 and at that time, the appellant-defendant was a tenant in the suit premises. The respondent- plaintiff had purchased two shops adjacent to each other and subsequently filed suits for eviction against both the tenants on the ground of bona fide need alongwith other issues. However, so far as the present appeal is concerned, the grounds of bona fide need, non-payment of rent, making material alteration in the suit premises were taken. So far as the suit in respect of other adjacent shop was concerned, it had been decreed and the said tenant vacated the shop. In the present case, admittedly the defendant contested the suit and in view of the pleadings, large number of issues were framed, including bona fide need, compar