Heard learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. S. K. Senapati. None appears for respondents. The plaintiff Ila Rani Chakravarty brought title suit No. 171/73 after issuing a notice to the defendant petitioner for eject­ment of the defendant petitioner from the suit premises on the ground of her bonafide requirement or personal use. The suit was decreed in favour of the plaintiff landlord. Against the decision there was an appeal before the learned Asstt. District Judge being Title Appeal No. 104/79. The learned appellate court dismissed the appeal and upheld the judgment passed by the learned trial court. During the pendency of the appeal the plaintiff Mrs. Chak­ravarty died and the suit property was inherited by her legal heirs being PW. 1 husband Nalini Chakravarty and Opposite party No. 2 being daughter of the plaintiff. In the finding made by the learned appellate court, it has been stated that the suit holding is required for the plaintiff's personal use and occupation. It is to be stated as submitted by learned counsel Mr. Sena­pati the suit was brought on the ground of bonafide require­ment of the plaintiff, Mrs. Chakravarty. It has not been dis­cussed or decided by the learned appellate court whether bona­fide requirement alleged by the lendlord plaintiff devolved on her legal heirs or the present opposite party. Under Section 5 (c) of the Assam Urban Areas Rent Control Act, it is pro­vided that where the house is bonafide required by the learned either for purposes of repairs or re-building or for his own occupation or any person for whose benefit the house is held or where the landlord has had any other cause which may be deemed satisfactory by the court, the landlord can sue the tenant for eviction. But no discussion has been made by the learned appe­llate court, in the light of these provisions nor is there any decision in this connection. The bonafide requirement of the original plaintiff might not that of her legal heirs. Therefore, I find it to be a fit case for remand to the appellate court for re-hearing the appeal in view of the aforesaid discussion. In the result the petition is allowed. The judgment and decree passed by the learned appellate court are set aside and the matter is remanded to the appellate court for hearing the parties afresh and for coming to a decision as directed above.