SHRI TARAMONI CHAUDHURY Vs. PARISH CHANDRA PAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE suit brought by the Petitioner as Plaintiff against the -Respondent (Defendant -tenant) for recovery of possession of the suit land and house was dismissed by the Sadar Munsiff (1), Silchar, in T.S. No. 112 of 1975, Appeal against the judgment and decree of the Munsiff was also dismissed by the Assistant District Judge (1), Silchar, in Title Appeal No. 81 of 1977. This is now how the revision has come up for hearing in this Court.

(2.) THE facts found proved by the Courts below are that the High Court of Calcutta appointed a Receiver of the suit land and house. The Receiver leased out the suit land and house to the Defendant -tenant. But the Receiver, with the permission of the High Court of Calcutta, sold the suit land and house to the Plaintiff -Petitioner under a registered sale deed dated 13.9.1974. The Defendant -tenant came to know of the assignment only from the assignee (Plaintiff) when he received a notice of eviction from the Plaintiff. Under one of the conditions of the lease, the Defendant -tenant was to pay rent for the -month of September 1974 by 7.10.1974. The Defendant -tenant having no notice of the assignment, paid the rent to the assignor, but the assignor and/or his employees refused to accept the rent paid by the Defendant -tenant for the month of September. Therefore, the Defendant -tenant deposited the rents under the Urban Areas Rent Control Act, 1972 (for short the "Act") within time on 12.10.1974, However 12.10.1974 the Defendant -tenant deposited the rent for the months of September and October of 1974 in favour of the assignor. As soon as the Defendant -tenant came to know about the assignment, he offered or tendered or paid the rent to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff also refused to accept the same. Therefore, the Defendant -tenant amended the rent deposit petition on 18.8.1975 and has been depositing the rent in the name of the Plaintiff (assignee) under the "Act".

(3.) UNDER Section 109 of the Transfer of Property Act (for short T.P. Act), if the lessor transfers the property leased the transferee in absence of the contract to the contrary, shall possess all the rights, and, if the lessee so elects, be subject to all the liabilities of the lessor as to the property transferred. To receive rent is one of the rights. Therefore, the assignee has the right to receive rent from the tenant, in the absence of the contract to the contrary. In the present case, there is, no such a contract. In this view of the matter, the Petitioner is entitled to receive rent/or rents from the Defendant -tenant and is the land -lord within the meaning of Section 2(c) of the "Act".