BAIDYANATH SEAL Vs. RAMA RANI GHOSH AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application is at the instance of the defendant and is directed against the order No. 241 dated May 15, 2008 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Fourth Court, Howrah in Title Suit No. 379 of 1994 thereby allowing an application under Sec. 17(3) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act and thereby rejecting an application under Sec. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(2.) The short fact is that the plaintiffs/opposite parties instituted the Title Suit No. 379 of 1994 for ejectment and other reliefs. In that suit, the defendant/petitioner appeared and filed an application under Sec. 17(1) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act for permitting him to the deposit current rent in Court and another application under Sec. 17(2) (2A)(B) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act praying for allowing him to pay arrears of rent, if any, by easy instalments after determination of the same. That application under Sec. 17(2)(2A)(B) was heard and disposed of by the learned Trial Judge holding that the defendant/petitioner was a defaulter in payment of rent since November, 1992 to January, 1996 and accordingly he was to pay Rs. 2,535/ - as arrears of rent for that period. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application under Sec. 151 of the C.P.C. praying for setting aside that order contending that he had already deposited the rents for the said period with the rent controller and as such, he was not a defaulter at all. But by the impugned order, the learned Trial Judge has allowed the application under Sec. 17(3) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act for striking off the defence as well as an application under Sec. 151 of the C.P.C. filed by the plaintiff was dismissed. Being aggrieved by the impugned order, the defendant has come up with this application.

(3.) Now the point for consideration is whether the impugned order can be sustained.