BAIDYANATH KUNDU Vs. JYOTSHNA RANI KARMAKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Rule is directed against order No. 56 dated February 2, 1971, passed by the learned Munsif, Second Court, Midnapur, in a proceeding under Section 17 (3) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956. By the said order the learned Munsif struck out the defence of the petitioner against delivery of possession.

(2.) The opposite party filed the suit for ejectment against the petitioner on the ground of default in payment of rent and also on the ground of reasonable requirement. It was alleged by the opposite party that the petitioner failed to pay rent since September 1966. Further, it was alleged by the opposite party that the deposit of rent made by the petitioner with the Rent Controller since November, 1967 and also the deposit made by the petitioner in Court after entering appearance in the suit, were all invalid deposits. The petitioner did not make any application under Section 17 (2) of the Act.

(3.) The defence of the petitioner was, that he paid rent to the husband of the opposite party upto October 1967, but no receipt was granted by him. Since November 1967, the petitioner had been depositing rent with the Rent Controller as the husband of the opposite party refused to accept rent remitted by him by postal money-order. The petitioner denied that he was a defaulter as alleged by the opposite party. The further defence of the petitioner was that there was no relationship of landlord and tenant between the opposite party and the petitioner. The case that was made out by the petitioner in his written statement was that the plaintiffs husband Bhupendra Nath Karmakar executed an agreement of tenancy describing him as the landlord of the suit premises and collected rent from the petitioner. The petitioner denied that the deposits made by him with the Rent Controller were invalid deposits,