AJIT KUMAR ROY Vs. SURENDRA NATH GHOSE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AN experiment in law -making with a view to establishing some control over the rents chargeable for premises let to tenants, primarily in Calcutta and other municipal areas, has been going on in this Province since 1943 and so far there have been five products of that experiment. As each of the successive pieces of legislation superseded its predecessor, there has on each occasion been some attempt to adjust the new law to the old or to extend some of the benefits of the new law to those against whom the old law had already been set in motion The question involved in the present reference concerns one such extension made of the Act of 1950. It arises in the following way.

(2.) THE ' West Bengal Premises .Bent Control (Temporary Provisions) Act came into force on 1 -12 -1948 and remained in operation till 30 -3 -1950. Under Section 12(3) of that Act, a tenant who committed default in paying the rent accruing due from him after the commencement of the Act for three consecutive months, ceased to be a tenant and his interest in the tenancy was, by such default, 'ipso facto' determined. Thereafter, he became a trespasser and if sued in ejectment, had no means open to him to avert either a decree or actual eviction. But the next Rent Act, West Bengal Act No. 17 of 1950, which superseded the Act of 1948 and came into force on 31 -3 -1950, contained no provision similar to Section 12(3) of the 1948 Act. It provided instead by proviso (i) to Section 12(1) that if a tenant committed default in paying duly the rent legally payable by him for two months, the protection conferred by the Act against a decree for ejectment would not be available to him and even that less stringent provision was made subject to an exception contained in Section 14. The exception was that if on a suit being brought, it was found that the only ground which excluded the tenant from the protection of the Act was a default as contemplated by proviso (i) to Section 12(1) and the tenant yet paid up all arrears of rent due from him upto date, as determined by the Court, which it would be the duty of the Court to determine, and also paid them by a date which it would be the duty of the Court to fix, ejectment would be refused, in spite of the previous default. This, therefore, was the last chance provided to a defaulting tenant to save himself from eviction. On the other hand, the exception itself was made subject to an exception, added by a proviso thereto. It was to the effect that if a tenant was found to have been in default within the meaning of Section 12(1), Proviso (i) on three different occasions within a period of eighteen months, he would not be entitled to the benefit of Section 14. Both the exception and the exception thereto are contained in Sub -section (3) of Section 14 which is in the following terms:

(3.) WHEN the Legislature passed the Act of 1950, it was mindful of the fact that at the date the Act came into force, there would be some persons against whom a decree for ejectment had already been passed on the ground of a statutory extinction of their tenancies under Section 12(3) of the Act of 1948, but who had not yet been actually evicted. Against some others, suits bound to succeed on that sole ground would be pending. Provision for some relief to those two classes of persons wastherefore made by Section 18 of the Act, as regards the former class, by Sub -sections (1) to (4) and as regards the latter, by Sub -section (5). But the language used in the section to describe the persons intended to be relieved was such that it was precisely they who were excluded: persons affected by a statutory extinction of their tenancies under Section 12(3) of the Act of 1948 and by decrees passed or suits pending on that ground were not covered by the language of Section 18 at all. When that strange result was pointed out in judicial decisions, the Legislature passed an. amending Act, the West Bengal Premises Bent Control (Temporary Provisions) (Amendment) Act 62 of 1950. That Act, which came into force on 30 -11 -1950, altered the language of section. 18 and did it in such manner as not only to make it applicable to persons who had ceased to be tenants under Section 12(3) of the Act of 1948, but also to confine it solely to them. For some reason which it is not easy to divine, the Legislature seems also to have thought that a separate provision was necessary in regard to persons against whom a decree had been passed between the dates of the main Act of 1950 and the amending Act and from whom possession had not yet been recovered. Such provision was made by Section 6 of the Amending Act. It would appear from an examination of the law, as finally enacted, that the three different classes of persons affected by Section 12(3) of the Act of 1948 who have been dealt with by the main Act of 1950 and the amending Act, have been dealt with in different ways. To the first class belong those against whom a decree had already been passed before the commencement of the Act of 1950, but from whom possession had not yet been recovered. They are dealt with by Sub -sections (1) to (4) of Section 18 of the main Act of 1950 and the provision made with regard to them is direct and unqualified. It is provided that if such a person makes an application within a certain time, the Court shall determine the amount of rent due from him upto the month of the order, treating the tenancy as always subsisting, as also interest thereon at a certain rate, and shall fix a time within a certain limit for payment of the same and if the person concerned pays the amount within the time specified, the decree for ejectment shall be vacated. If he does not, it shall stand. The next class is constituted of persons against whom a suit was pending either in a Court of first instance or in a Court of revision or appeal, at the date of the commencement of the main Act of 1950. They are dealt with by Section 13(5) of the Act and the provision made with regard to them is of a somewhat roundabout character. It is provided that in the case of such persons,