Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

1. The only question argued in this appeal was a question of res judicata and, in the end, the only ground on which the bar of 'res judicata' was sought to be avoided was that the decision in the earlier suit was a decision of a Court which was not competent to try the subsequent suit out of which the appeal had arisen.

2. The facts are not many and may be briefly stated. A two-storied building, known as 69, Park Street, is admittedly situated within the limits of the ordinary original civil jurisdiction of this Court and in 1951, the Appellants, who may be compendiously called the Hickies, were admittedly in occupation of both the upper and lower flats as tenants. The premises belong to the Trust Estate N. B. Elias and R. O. Cohen and the trustee of the trust is the Official Trustee of West Bengal. In 1951, the Official Trustee brought two suits for ejectment against the Appellants, one in respect of the upper flat and one in respect of the lower, on the basis that there were two several tenancies in respect of the two flats and that both the tenancies had been determined by notices to quit.

4. The suits were heard together. In the course of them, the plaintiff Official Trustee made two applications under Section 14(3), Rent Control Act, by which he submitted that the defendants were not entitled to orders under Section 14(1), enabling them to deposit the arrears of rent and thereby avert ejectment. After certain adjournments, it was directed that the applications would be dealt with at the final hearing of the suits, along with all other issues, and after certain further adjournments, 8-12-1951 was fixed as the date of hearing. On that date, the lawyer for the defendants stated to the Court that he had no instructions, but seems nevertheless to have made an application for time.

"Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law, a suit by a landlord against a tenant in which recovery of possession of any premises to which this Act applies is claimed, shall lie to the Courts, as set out in Schedule B, and no other Court shall be competent to entertain or try such suit."

12. Schedule B provides that in the case of premises situated wholly within the ordinary original civil jurisdiction of the High Court, the appropriate Court for suits for ejectment against tenants shall be, where the monthly rent exceeds Rs. 500/-, the High Court and in all other cases, the Chief Judge of the Calcutta Court of Small Causes who shall be entitled to transfer the suit for trial to another Judge of the same Court. Since the premises in question in the present case are situated wholly within the original jurisdiction of this Court and since, according to the Official Trustee, there were two tenancies carrying rents of Rs. 350/- and Rs. 375/- per month respectively, suits for ejectment in respect of such tenancies could be brought only before the Chief Judge of the Court of Small Causes.