Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Smt. Sandhya Biswas vs Bijoy Kumar Barui on 18 March, 2025
AD-16
Ct No.16
18.03.2025
TN
SAT 81 of 2022
IA No: CAN 1 of 2022
Smt. Sandhya Biswas
Vs.
Bijoy Kumar Barui
Md. Ashraf Ali
....for the appellant
Mr. D. K. Adhikari,
Mr. Debdip Adhikari
....for the respondent
1. The present second appeal will be heard on the following substantial questions of law:
(i) Whether both the courts below committed a substantial error of law in misinterpreting the provisions of Section 24 of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 inasmuch as the non-admission on withdrawal contemplated in the said provision is applicable only in respect of correctness of the rent or the rate thereof, the period of default and the amount due or any similar facts stated in the application and not to the landlord-tenant relationship itself between the parties.
(ii) Whether the learned first appellate court misinterpreted the applicability of Ram Awatar Singh vs. Khajan Singh reported at AIR 1978 Cal 337 in the distinguishable facts and circumstances of the present case. 2
(iii) Whether the acceptance of the rent deposited by the appellant with the Controller by withdrawal of the same by the respondent during pendency of the suit itself operates as an admission against the respondent as to landlord-tenant relationship between the parties.
(iv) Whether the expression "or any other fact" in Section 24 of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 should be read in consonance with the principle of ejusdem generis, attributing similar meaning to the phrase as the preceding words in the said Section, which all relate to non-admission regarding particulars of the rent, the rate of the rent, period of default and such other specific details and not to the landlord-tenant relationship itself.
2. In view of the appeal having been admitted, a strong prima facie case for hearing of the appeal on merits has been made out.
3. Accordingly, we grant stay of operation of the impugned judgment and decree as well as stay of all further proceedings of the connected execution case bearing Other Execution Case No. 8 of 2014 pending before the Court of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), First Court, Paschim Medinipur till disposal of the application.
3
4. The respondent shall file affidavit-in-opposition to the application within a fortnight from date disclosing the particulars of occupation charges, if any, payable as condition for the stay.
5. Reply thereto, if any, shall be filed within a week thereafter.
6. The application shall be listed before the learned Single Judge then having determination to take up second appeals and connected applications on April 28, 2025, or any other date as convenient to the said Bench, under the heading "Application".
7. It is made clear that the question of whether occupation charges shall be imposed as a condition of the grant of stay as well as the quantum of such occupation charges, if any, are left open to the decided at the final hearing of the application.
(Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.) (Uday Kumar, J.)