Anamika Roy vs. Jatindra Chowrasiya and Ors. Civil Appeal No. 4539 of 2013 (Arising out
of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 30300 of 2011), Decided on May 9, 2013
The
question before the Hon’ble Supreme Court was whether the High Court was
justified in holding that both the trial court and the appellate court have not
examined the question of partial eviction?
The Court
held:
“There is no dispute
with regard to the ratio laid down by this Court in Rahman Jeo Wangnoo vs. Ram Chand
and Others (AIR 1978 SC 413) that the provision contained in the West Bengal
Premises Tenancy Act, 1956 mandates the court to consider whether partial
eviction as contemplated therein should be ordered or the entire building
should be directed to be vacated. However, while deciding the issue of
reasonable personal requirement of the landlord, if the trial court or the
appellate court also considers the extent of requirement and records a finding that
the entire premises or part thereof satisfies the need of the landlord, then,
in our considered opinion, there is sufficient compliance of the provision
contained in the said Act.” [Para 19]
To see full text follow the link: