SIPRA MITRA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present Revisional application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India arises out of an order dated 25th March, 1986 passed by the learned Arbitrator, Calcutta metropolitan Area Housing in Dispute Case No. 16/cnan/1985-1986. By the order challenged, the petition filed by the petitioner/defendant no. 1 regarding non-maintainability of the instant dispute case was rejected.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated as it appears that: the present petitioner Sipra Mitra is a tenant under the Opposite Party No. 1, Profulla Kr. Sarkar in respect of Flat No. 43, "chaturanga" at 32, Gobinda Auddy Road, Calcutta. The Opposite Party No. 1 is a member of the Opposite Party no. 2, the Alipore. Adarsha Housing Society and has been allotted "the flat No. 48 as Housing property. An agreement was initially made between the Society, the Opposite Party No. 1 and the husband of the petitioner for two years from 1978-1980. Subsequently, another agreement was made after the expiry of the said period between the society, the petitioner and the Opposite Party No. 1 from 1980-1982. The said agreement expired on July 31, 1982. Since then no fresh agreement was made. However, the petitioner continued as a monthly tenant under the Opposite Party No. l in respect of the said flat. By notice dated 23rd. July, 1985, the Opposite Party No. l asked the petitioner to vacate and handover possession of the said flat on the expiry of the month of August, 1985 as the Opposite Party No. l reasonably required the said flat. Thereafter the Dispute Case No. 16/ cnan/1985-1986 was filed by the Opposite Party No. 1 under Section 86 of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act for recovery of khas possession in respect of the said flat by evicting the petitioner there from and for mesne profit from the month of September, 1985, and other decidental reliefs. On the 10th of February, 1986 the petitioner who was described as defendant no. 1 filed an application praying, inter-alia, that the issues with regard to the maintainability of the dispute case, the jurisdiction of the Deputy Registrar to entertain, try and decide the points as to whether the Civil Court has an exclusive jurisdiction to try and decide the case of eviction under Section 13 of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, should be heard as preliminary point. It was prayed further that the preliminary issues may be decided before going into other paints or proceeding with or taking any further steps in the said dispute case.

(3.) AFTER considering the said petition, the learned Arbitrator found that in the present case, the Opposite Party No. 2, the Co operative housing Society provided housing accommodation to its members who have no house to reside at and the object of the society necessarily defined the nature of the affairs in the society. The initiation of the co-operative Society for removing an act of trespass by itself against a stranger from a flat allotted to a member can well be considered as a part of the affairs of the society. It was found also that the housing society has to see that the fiats are in occupation of its lawful members as per the Regulations incorporated in the byelaws of the said society. Thus it appeared to the learned arbitrator that the prayer for recovery of possession of the flat previously occupied by a person on the basis of an agreement since revoked, comes within the ambit of Section 86 of the West Bengali Co operative Societies Act as a dispute. It was further considered to be a special provision made in the said Act and the Rules framed there under to save the expenditure and shorten the time for legal proceeding concerned the co-operative. After discussing the submissions of the respective parties, the Learned arbitrator did not see any ground to admit the petition regarding non-maintainability of the dispute case and hence rejected the same.