Case title: BIJAY KUMAR MANISH KUMAR HUF VS. ASHWIN BHANULAL DESAI
Case no: I.A. No.120219/2020 IN Special Leave Petition (C) No.4049 of 2020
Order on: May 17, 2024
Quorum: HON’BLE JUSTICE J.K. MAHESHWARI AND MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KAROL
Fact of the case:
Bijay Kumar Manish Kumar HUF filed special leave petitions (SLPs) challenging the judgment and order of the High Court of Calcutta. The dispute arises between a property regarding the non-payment of rent and the determination of the lease agreement. Which is located in the commercial hub of Kolkata’s Dalhousie area. The lease agreement between the parties was executed on 23rd February 1991 by the petitioner’s predecessor-in-interest. According to the complainant, since 2002 respondent has failed to pay rent and his municipal tax payments have not been made ever since 1996. The lease has been forfeited or determined due to the failure to pay rent. However, the respondent has neither surrendered possession of the property nor paid the rent.
Issues framed by court:
Whether the West Bengal Tenancy Act 1997 or the Transfer of Property Act 1882 should govern the framing of issues in the landlord-tenant dispute.
Whether the interlocutory applications seeking direction for payment of rent and associated benefits should be disposed of.
Legal provisions:
West Bengal Tenancy Act, 1997: Deals with regulations related to land tenancy in the state of West Bengal, India.
Transfer of Property Act, 1882: Deals with the transfer of property by various means such as sale, mortgage, lease, and gift. It governs the legal principles and procedures related to the transfer of immovable property in India.
Article 227 of the Constitution of India: Deals with the power of superintendence of High Courts over all courts and tribunals throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction.
Order VII Rule 11 CPC: Deals with the provision for rejection of plaints.
Contentions of Appellant:
The appellant challenges the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Calcutta, which held that the West Bengal Tenancy Act, 1997 should govern the landlord-tenant dispute instead of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. The appellant argues that the reasoning adopted by the learned Single Judge in the High Court is not within the scope of the present adjudication. Interlocutory applications have been filed seeking directions for the payment of rent and associated benefits concerning the disputed property, which is the subject matter of the present dispute.
Contentions of Respondents:
The respondent argues that the premises should be governed under the Tenancy Act and seeks the rejection of the plaint filed by the petitioner. They contend that the dispute should be governed by the West Bengal Tenancy Act, 1997 not the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. The respondent raises concerns about the legality and sufficiency of the plaint filed by the petitioner, including issues related to the valuation and stamp duty.
Court analysis& Judgement:
In this case, the Supreme Court addressed interlocutory applications seeking directions for the payment of rent and associated benefits related to the demised premises, pending adjudication of the Special Leave Petitions. The court noted various factors, including the location of the premises, the agreed rent, alleged non-payment of rent, and default in payment of interest. After considering the calculations of dues submitted by the petitioner during the hearing, the court accepted them. It directed the respondent to deposit the amount of Rs.5,15,05,512/- with the Registry of the Court within four weeks. Failure to comply would cause legal consequences, including willful disobedience of the order. The Registry was instructed to place the received amount in a short-term, interest-bearing fixed deposit. In addition, similar interlocutory applications filed in other Special Leave Petitions were disposed of in the same terms as the one discussed above. The court scheduled the Special Leave Petitions for appearance in July 2024.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Judgement Reviewed By- Antara Ghosh
