DWARKA NATH PYNE Vs. ABHIJIT SANYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the parties.

(2.) THIS is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India directed against an order, being Order No. 109 dated 10th August, 2007, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 3rd Court at Alipore, district - South 24 Parganas in Title Suit No. 336 of 1995.

(3.) THE learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner herein, being the defendant No. 2, in the Title Suit No. 336 of 1995, pending before the learned Court below submits that while hearing out the two interlocutory applications of the defendant Nos. 1 and 2, both under the provision of section 17 (2) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956, the learned Judge had made certain observations in the order impugned which were beyond the scope of section 17 (2) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956, as coming to a definitive finding with regard to the end of tenant-landlord relationship of the petitioner herein with that of the plaintiff. According to the learned advocate for the petitioner herein, being the defendant No. 2 in the suit, the scope of an application under section 17 (2) of the West Bengal premises Tenancy Act, 1956, is to determine the amount of rent payable by the tenant and for the Court to pass necessary directions or orders for payment of such rent as well as arrear rent. The learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that in order to do so, the Court needs to come to a prima facie finding only, with regard to the existence of a relationship of landlord and tenant and not a definitive and final finding. The learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that in the facts and circumstances the learned Court below, in the interlocutory proceeding under section 17 (2) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956, proceeded to go beyond that prima facie stage and had, in effect, adjudicated upon the real issue of the parties in the suit proceeding, at the interlocutory stage by coming to a definitive and final finding with regard to non-existence of relationship of tenant and landlord between the plaintiff and the defendant No. 2, being the petitioner herein.