RADHARANI DASSI Vs. ANGURBALA DASSI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision case arises out of a suit by landlords for eviction of a tenant. On June 24, 1960 the trial Court dismissed the suit. On an appeal this Court by its judgment dated June 12, 1961 held that due notice to quit had been served upon the tenant, that the landlords had failed to prove that they reasonably required the premises for own occupation, set aside the decree passed by the trial Court and remanded the suit to the trial Court for further consideration of the question whether there was a subletting by the tenant of a major portion of the premises within the meaning of section 13 (1) (a) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956. On November 11, 1961 the trial Court received the records of the suit together with the remand order and the receipt was noted in the order-sheet. The parties appeared in the trial court sometime in the month of November, 1961. The landlords subsequently applied to the trial Court for an order striking off the defense of the tenant on the ground that the tenant had failed to deposit or pay to the landlords the monthly sums equivalent to the rents for several months as required by section 17 (1) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956. The trial Court dismissed the application. The landlords now ask us to revise and set aside this order. The learned Advocate on behalf of the petitioners landlords has pressed before us three defaults for the months of Sravana, Agrahayan and Pous, 1368 B. S. For the purposes of this case it is sufficient to say that the landlords have established the default for the month of Agrahayan, 1368 B. S. The last date of Agrahayan, 1368 B. S. corresponds to December 16, 1961. Under section 17 (1) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956, the tenant had time to deposit in court the monthly sum for this month up to the 15th Agrahayan, 1368 B. S. corresponding to December 31, 1961. The tenant deposited this rent in court on January 11, 1962. The obligation of the tenant to make the deposit under section 17 (1) revived as from the date of the re-admission of the suit by the trial court after remand. Consequently I am constrained to hold that the tenant failed to deposit or pay the monthly sum for the month of Agrahayan, 1368 B. S. as required by section 17 (1 ). It follows that the impugned order must be set aside. I have come to this conclusion with some reluctance. The records of this case reveal that the landlords have slender chance of winning the case on the merits and consequently are taking advantage of technical defaults by the tenant. Section 17 of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956 however gives me no power to condone the delay.

(2.) WE pass the following order: the order No. 39 dated July 31, 1962 passed by the trial court is set aside. The application of the plaintiffs is allowed. The defense as against delivery of possession is struck off. The trial court is directed to proceed with the hearing of the suit in accordance with law. There will be no order as to the costs of this Court.

(3.) R. N. DUTT, J.- I respectfully agree with the order passed by My Lord. I should however like to add a few words.