ASHWIN DESAI Vs. BIJAY KUMAR MANISH KUMAR HUF

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this revisional application, the defendant-tenant in the ejectment suit, being Title Suit No. 2450 of 2007, has challenged the order dated August 18, 2016 passed by the learned Judge, 11th Bench, City Civil Court at Calcutta. By the impugned order the learned Court below has rejected the application filed by the defendant-petitioner under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short "the Code") inter alia, on the ground that an earlier application filed by the defendant-petitioner for rejection of plaint was rejected and the said order of rejection was upheld by this Court in revisional jurisdiction.

(2.) According to Mr. Debdut Mukherjee, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, from the plaint filed in the eviction suit it is evident that the plaintiff-opposite party has claimed eviction of the defendant-petitioner from the suit property on the ground of forfeiture of lease, under Section 111(g) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, for alleged non-payment of rent and the defendantpetitioner had filed the earlier application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code treating the suit to be a suit under the Transfer of Property Act. He further submitted that subsequently, the defendant-petitioner has found that his tenancy in respect of the suit property is admittedly governed by the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 and, as such, the second application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code was filed, before the learned Court below, on the ground of absence of any notice under Section 6(4) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997. He strenuously contended that the impugned order passed by the learned Court below rejecting the application of the defendant-petitioner under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code is patently erroneous.

(3.) However, after considering the materials on record, particularly the plaint filed in the ejectment suit, as has been disclosed in the revisional application I, prima facie, find some force in the submission of Mr. Mukherjee, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner.