SONAPUR TEA CO. PVT. LTD. Vs. PRATAP DEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant application has been filed challenging the orders dtd. 7/9/2023 and 29/9/2023 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division) No.2, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati in Title Suit No.39/2022.

(2.) From a perusal of the materials on record, it reveals that the plaintiffs herein had filed a suit seeking ejectment of the defendants, recovery of arrear license fee, realization of pendente lite and future license fees as damages. Upon the said suit being filed, the Defendant Nos. 1 and 3 had filed a written statement. In the written statement more particularly at paragraph No.8 and 9, it has been the stand of the defendants amongst others that the defendants entered into a leave and license agreement with the Plaintiff No.1 on 1/1/2021 and thereupon, the defendants have been duly making the payment. Further to that, in paragraph No.25, it has also been mentioned that the Plaintiff No.2 did not receive the monthly fee for the month of November, 2021 for which the Defendant No.1 started depositing the rent in the Court in the form of N.J. cases in terms with Sec. 5(4) of the Assam Urban Areas Rent Control Act, 1972.

(3.) In the above context, this Court finds it relevant to take note of that there were two applications filed by the defendants. One was the Petition No.368 calling for the records of 14 N.J. Cases and the other application was filed under Order XI Rule 14 read with Sec. 30 of the Code for production of the various documents. Against both the petitions, the plaintiffs filed objection on 25/5/2023. In the objections filed to the Petition No.368 by the plaintiffs, it was specifically stated that when the defendants claimed that they are licensee, the provisions of the Assam Urban Areas Rent Control Act, 1972 has no relevance. In the objection filed to the Petition No.369, the plaintiffs have also sought for rejection of the said application on the grounds stated therein.