Meenakshi Madan Rai, J.

1. Assailing the Judgment and Decree passed by the Learned District Judge, East Sikkim, at Gangtok, in Eviction Suit No. 03 of 2014, vide Judgment dated 29-10-2015, in which the suit was decreed in favour of the Plaintiff (the Respondent herein), the instant Appeal has been preferred.

2. The grounds raised in the Appeal, inter alia, were that, the Learned Trial Court had erred in arriving at the finding that the suit premises were required by the Plaintiff/Respondent for his bona fide occupation, when infact, it was required for his wife, purportedly for selling Computer spare parts and accessories and imparting Computer Training. That, the wife of the Respondent was never financially dependent upon him and, therefore, could not be considered as a "dependent" in terms of the Gangtok Rent Control and Eviction Act I of 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act of 1956").

3. The facts may briefly be traversed to appreciate the matter in its correct perspective. The Respondent/Plaintiff (hereinafter be referred to as the "Plaintiff") is the absolute owner of the property in dispute being a shop measuring 10' x 30', i.e., a total of 300 sq. ft., on the sou