RAJPUTANA TRADING CO PVT LTD Vs. ISWARSINGH KRIPALSINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application, inter alia, for, reconsideration of an order passed by me on August 26, 1970 under Section 17 (3) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956, hereinafter referred to as the Act directing the striking out of the defence of the petitioner so far as delivery of the possession of the premises in suit was concerned. The said order was passed by me under Section 17 (3) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956 on the ground that the defendant had failed to pay the landlord or deposit either in Court or with the Rent Controller an amount equivalent to the rent in respect of the six tenancies mentioned in the plaint for the month of May 1969, that is, a period after the institution of the suit.

(2.) On March 6, 1969, the suit was filed by the plaintiff against the defendants for recovery of possession of the premises in suit which were the subject-matter of six different tenancies. The Writ of Summons was served on the defendants on April 7, 1969. The defendants entered appearance and filed written statement on or about May 5, 1969. On February 28, 1969 an application was made by the plaintiff in this suit, inter alia, for striking out the defence of the defendants so far as the recovery of possession was concerned on grounds of various defaults made in payment or deposit of rent mentioned in the petition filed in the said proceeding. After hearing the said application I held that the defendant No. 2 had defaulted in paying or depositing an amount equivalent to rent in respect of the tenancies which are the subject-matter of the suit for the month of May 1969. In that view of the matter, I directed the defence so far as recovery of possession was concerned in the suit to be struck out as mentioned earlier. This application, is made in the inherent jurisdiction of this Court to reconsider and recall the said order and rehear the said application on merit.

(3.) The defendant No. 2 who Is the petitioner in the instant application alleges that in fact there was no default in payment or deposit of rent in accordance with the provisions of the statute in respect of the said tenancies for the month of May, 1969. The petitioner has stated that the petitioner through one Govindlal Das on or about June 10, 1969 tendered to the landlord through one of its Directors, Durga Prosad More a total sum of Rs. 537.28 p. in respect of the six tenancies of the defendant at premises No. 97, Vivekananda Road, Calcutta "on account of rent and/or amount calculated at the rate of rent for the month of May 1969". Durga Prosad More refused to accept the said sum tendered to him in cash, as stated in sub-paragraph (i) of paragraph 13 of the petition in the instant application. In sub-paragraph (ii) of the said paragraph it is stated "upon such refusal to accept the rent so tendered" Mr. Das went to the Beadon Street Post Office and remitted the said total sum of Rs 537.28 p. by Money Order to the landlord.