Case Note & Summary
The appeals arose from eviction petitions filed by the respondent-landlord against the appellants-tenants under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997, on the ground of non-payment of arrears of rent. The tenants filed an application under Section 7(2) of the Act to determine the arrears, which was allowed by the Trial Court. The High Court of Calcutta set aside that order, holding that the application was not maintainable as the tenants had not deposited the admitted rent within the prescribed time. The Supreme Court considered whether the Limitation Act, 1963 applies to condone delay in filing such an application. The Court examined the provisions of Section 7 of the Act, which require the tenant to deposit admitted rent and file an application within one month of service of summons or appearance. The proviso to Section 7(2) allows only one extension of time up to two months after the order specifying arrears. The Court distinguished earlier judgments under the 1956 Act, which had a sub-section (2A) with a non obstante clause allowing unrestricted extension. The 1997 Act omits such provision, making the time limits mandatory. The Court held that Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not apply to an application under Section 7(2) as it is not an appeal or application for which limitation is prescribed under the Limitation Act. The Court also noted that the High Court's decision on merits was correct and did not require reference to a larger Bench. The appeals were dismissed, upholding the High Court's order setting aside the Trial Court's order.
Headnote
A) West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 - Section 7(2) - Application for determination of rent - Limitation Act, 1963 not applicable - The tenant must deposit admitted rent and file application within one month of service of summons or appearance; no provision for condonation of delay under Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963. The proviso allows only one extension of time up to two months after the order specifying arrears. (Paras 10-12) B) West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 - Section 7(2) - Pari materia with Section 17(2) of 1956 Act but without sub-section (2A) - The 1956 Act had sub-section (2A) with a non obstante clause allowing extension of time without restriction, which was relied upon in B.P. Khemka. The 1997 Act omits such provision, making the time limits mandatory. (Paras 11-12) C) West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 - Section 7(3) - Consequence of non-compliance - If tenant fails to deposit or pay within time or extended time, the Civil Judge shall strike out defence and proceed with hearing. The word 'shall' indicates mandatory nature. (Para 10) D) West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 - Section 7(4) - Relief from eviction - Tenant entitled to relief only if deposit/payment made as required; proviso bars relief if tenant again defaults for four months within twelve months. (Para 10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Limitation Act, 1963 applies to an application under Section 7(2) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 for condonation of delay in filing the application, and whether the High Court erred in not referring the matter to a larger Bench.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, holding that the High Court's order setting aside the Trial Court's order was correct. The Limitation Act, 1963 does not apply to an application under Section 7(2) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997. The time limits under Section 7(2) are mandatory, and only one extension of up to two months is permissible under the proviso. The Court did not find any error in the High Court's decision and did not require reference to a larger Bench.
Law Points
- Section 7(2) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act
- 1997
- Limitation Act
- 1963 not applicable
- extension of time only once up to two months
- pari materia with Section 17(2) of 1956 Act but without sub-section (2A)
- B.P. Khemka distinguished
- Nasiruddin and Arjun Khiamal Makhijani distinguished
