SHIBLAL TANTI Vs. SUSHITAL CHANDRA DEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Rule is not opposed. It arises of a proceeding under Section 31 of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956. Opposite party No. 2, who was the tenant of the disputed premises, was the applicant under the said section. The present Petitioner was impleaded in the said proceeding apparently as the agent of the landlady who was made opposite party No. 1 therein. The prayer in the said application was for restoration of electric connection, which had been cut off contrary to the provisions of the above section, There was no other prayer in the aforesaid application, but the learned Rent Controller, apparently taking it to be a full-fledged proceeding under Section 31, not only directed restoration of electric connection which had, of course, been done and the lines reconnected in the meantime, but also penalised the present Petitioner by a fine of Rs. 25, in default, simple imprisonment for three months, upon the finding that ha had cut off the aforesaid electric connection.

(2.) On appeal by the present Petitioner, the learned Rent Controller's decision was affirmed. Hence the present Rule.

(3.) The material portion of the order of the learned Rent Controller appears as follows: