HARIPADA SINGHA Vs. SAILESH CHANDRA MITRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Premises No. 4/D Mohanlal Street belongs to defendant No.1. He had let out the entire premises to defendant No. 2. Defendant No. 1 had obtained a decree in ejeetment against defendant No. 2 some time in 1848. When execution of the decree was started objections were taken by certain persons claiming to be sub-tenants under defendant No. 2. Subsequently in 1949 different suits were filed by the different sets of such sub-tenants for declaration that in spite of the decree in ejectment obtained by defendant No. 1 against defendant No. 2, the plaintiffs were not liable to be ejected. The present appellant had filed one of those suits. We are concerned here only with regard to the claim of the present plaintiff as the matters arising out of the other suits are not before me in connection with the present appeal. Both the Courts below have dismissed the plaintiff's suit.

(2.) The facts relevant for the disposal of the present appeal may be shortly stated. Defendant No. 2 sometime after he had been inducted had sublet different portions of the premises to different sub-tenants. It is admitted that the premises consisted of nine rooms and four sheds. It is admitted that out of these different rooms and sheds, only one room on the second floor of the building was retained by defendant No. 2, while the rest was in the occupation of the different sets of sub-tenants. The present plaintiff-appellant occupies two rooms and two sheds.

(3.) During the pendency of the appeal in this Court, the West Bengal Premises Rent Control (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1950 (XVII of 1950) came into force. On behalf of the appellant, it is contended in the first instance that the provisions of this Act should be applied for deciding the issues in the present appeal. The only provision under which this Act may be attracted in the case of pending proceedings are those contained in Section 18 of that Act. It is specifically stated that where