The tenant's failure to comply with the mandatory time limits for rent deposit under the WBPT Act results in the loss of defense against eviction, as extensions under the Limitation Act are inapplicable.

JUDGMENT :

J.K. Maheshwari, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. Challenging the order impugned dated 20.03.2024¹[C.O. No. 2783 of 2023] passed by High Court at Calcutta, confirming the order dated 17.07.2023²[Ejectment Suit No. 133 of 2019] of the Small Causes Court, which rejected the application under Section 5 of the LIMITATION ACT , 1963 filed by appellant–tenant seeking condonation of delay in filing application under Section 7 (1) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 (in short ‘WBPT Act’), the present appeal has been filed.

3. The appellant is a tenant in the suit premise being Flat No. 8, First Floor, 44, Elliot Road, Kolkata, West Bengal, and the respondents are the landlord. The relationship of landlord and the tenant is not in dispute. The admitted monthly rent of the suit premise is Rs. 1090/-. The landlord instituted the ejectment suit on 11.06.2019 on the grounds of arrears of rent, bona-fide need and sub-letting. On issuance of notice, summons were served upon tenant on 29.09.2022. From the next day and date, i.e., 30.09.2022 till 27.10.2022, the Courts were closed because of Durga Puja vacation in Kolkata. Thereafter, on 14.11.2022, the tenant filed the applications under Sections 7 (1) and 7(2) of the WBPT Act along with application under Section 5 of the LIMITATION ACT with the prayer to condone the delay of 17 days in filing the application under Section 7 (1) of the WBPT Act.

4. In the application filed under Section 7 (1) of the WBPT Act, prayer was made to deposit the ‘current rent’ for the month of November 2022 at the rate of Rs. 1090/- per month and to pass such order as the Court may deem fit. Similarly, application under Section 7 (2) of the WBPT Act, was filed seeking determination of default period, if any, and to refund the excess amount paid and to pass such order as may deem fit.

5. Learned Small Causes Court by the impugned order rejected the application under Section 5 of the LIMITATION ACT , inter-alia, observing that the period to file an application as specified under Section 7 (1) of the WBPT Act is thirty days, which cannot be extended by aid of Section 5 of the LIMITATION ACT . Aggrieved by the said order, the tenant preferred the revision before the High Court, which was dismissed maintaining the order of the learned Small Causes Court with certain observations qua applicability of Sections 7 (1) and (2) of the WBPT Act. Hence, this appeal.

6. Mr. Uday Gupta, learned senior counsel for the appellant– tenant has strenuously urged that the tenant was lawfully inducted by the respondents and has regularly paid the rent by cheque to the son-in-law of the landlord (respondent no. 1), details of which have been specified in the application preferred under Section 7 (1) and 7(2) of WBPT Act. It is urged that as per the details of the cheque amount, a total sum of Rs. 2,80,500/- has been paid and as per the averments made in the plaint, the rent due is from March 2017, which comes to sixty eight months till date of filing of applications under Section 7 (1) and 7(2). As such the payment made is more than the rent amount due, therefore, refund of the said amount was sought for. It is urged that when amount of rent is paid in excess, the applications under Section 7 (1) and (2) of WBPT Act ought to be considered on merits along with the application for condonation of del