Categories
Business in India Legal Article Real Estate Help

Legal Cases #4: Loknath Dhal v/s Gita Rani Roy (C.O.No. 3571 of 2013)

Loknath Dhal v/s Gita Rani Roy (C.O.No. 3571 of 2013)

In this case, the petitioner filed a case under Article 227 of the Indian Constitution. In the petition, he seeks to quash the order number 14 of 19.06.2013 in Title Suit No.17 of 2013 issued by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), 2nd Court, Chandannagar for the dismissal of the application filed on May 2, 2013, by the defendant/petitioner praying to consider the delay in the deposition of the admitted arrear rent.

Furthermore, the plaintiff/opposite party filed an eviction suit, recovery of khas possession consequential reliefs, and mense profit against the petitioner/defendant mainly on the ground of default of paying rent. Besides the plaintiff stated that the defendant is a tenant of a room where he runs a shop and pays a monthly rent of Rs. 200/-. Meanwhile, the plaintiff also claimed that the defendant has defaulted the rent or not aid any amount since July 2020.

On the other hand, under section 7 (1) and section 7 (2) of the West Bengal Tenancy Act 1997, the petitioner/defendant filed two applications on his appearance on 14.03.2013 and started the deposition of the current rent on his personal risk.

Moreover, in both applications as well as in the written statement the petitioner/defendant accepted that he has not paid the rent since July 2020 or the statement of the plaintiff regarding the non-payment of rent is true. Instead of paying the admitted arrear rent or the due amount the defendant, on 02.05.2013, filed a petition under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code. In the petition, the defendant requested to consider the delay of payment of the rent. Moreover, he also requested that he will pay to admitted arrear rent with additional interest. However, his petition was rejected by the court.

Finally, the court stated that ‘under sub-section (3), the tenant shall pay in the court of directly to the property owner or landlord identified by the court within such further time, or 15 days from the day of such determination but must not exceed 3 months. On the other hand, the tenant must pay te rent in the court or to the landlord every month until the period that has been determined by the court. Meanwhile, the rent must be paid following the English calendar every month or with the 15th of every month.

Finally, the honourable court decided that the court possesses its power in terms of condonation of default wherever the special Act provides for an extension. But in a situation when the law does not allow or permit neither for extension of time for the payment of default rent nor to condone the default in terms of paying within the determined period, the court also does not have such power to do so. Hence, due to the absence of such provisions under the Rajasthan Act, the court has no power to condone the default in depositing the rent or extend the time for depositing the rent. So, the petition filed by the petitioner was rejected based on such grounds.

For more details, check out https://youtu.be/A5ypMJuCB84, you can also reach out to me here or email – chenoyceil@gmail.com.

Bengali Legal Cases #4 । Advocate Chenoy Ceil | Shri Loknath Dhal Vs. Gita Rani Roy

Ask any Query...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.