M N GHOSAL Vs. PROBODE K BANEEJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner before us is an applicant under Section 16(3) of the new West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act of 1956 (West Bengal Act XII of 1956). He claims to be a sub-tenant in respect of the disputed premises comprising a portion of Municipal Premises No. 7/1B Eussa Eoad, Bhowanipore, re-numbered as 44-B Syamaprosad Mookerjee Eoad. On November 26, 1956 the Petitioner applied to the Rent Controller, Calcutta, for inter alia a declaration of his direct tenancy under the above section. The application was registered as Case No. 2640B of 1956, and, in the said proceeding and pending the same, he applied for the issue of a temporary in junction restraining opposite party No. 1, who is the owner of the disputed premises, from executing a decree for ejectment, obtained by him (opposite party No. 1) against the predecessor-in-interest of opposite parties Nos. 2 to 5 who according to the Petitioner, were his immediate landlords as tenants under the said opposite party No. 1 and from ousting the Petitioner thereby. That application, which was made on February 20, 1957, was rejected by the Bent Controller and, feeling aggrieved the Petitioner moved this Court and obtained the present rule.

(2.) The relevant facts lie within a short compass and they are as follows:

(3.) The Controller has taken the view that, as under the new Act of 1956 a tenant, against whom a decree for ejectment has been obtained, cannot be regarded as a tenant and as, without a tenant, there cannot be a sub-tenant; the Petitioner cannot claim to be a Sub-tenant and his application for temporary injunction would, therefore, fail for want of a prima facie case. The Controller was further of the opinion that he, as Rent Controller, had no power to issue a temporary injunction, particularly to restrain execution of a decree for ejectment, validly obtained. On both these grounds, he has dismissed the Petitioner's application.