R.K. Merathia, J.-This Civil Revision application has been filed against the judgment dated 29.11.2006 passed in Title (Eviction) Suit No. 17 of 2004 by learned Subordinate Judge-I, Dmmka decreeing the suit filed by the opposite party against the petitioner.

2. Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, appearing for the petitioners-defendants-tenants submitted that in view of Clause 7 of the lease deed the opposite party-plaintiff-landlord was bound to renew the lease, though on mutual terms, and therefore, expiry of period of tenancy could not be a ground to pass order of eviction against the petitioners. He further submitted that the requirement of the opposite party was not bona fide and in any event any such requirement could be substantially satisfied by evicting the petitioner from a part of the suit premises and allowing it to continue occupation of the part of the premises.

3. This Title (Eviction) Suit was instituted by the opposite party-landlord, against the petitioners-tenants, under the provisions of Section 11 (1)(c) i.e. on the grounds of personal requirement of the landlord and (e) on the ground of expiry of period of tenancy.

4. According to the landlord a notice dated 13.9.2004 w