The Calcutta Thika Tenancy Act supplements the Transfer of Property Act and does not override its provisions in determining the period of notice for ejectment of a manufacturing tenant.

P. N. MOOKERJEE, J.

( 1 ) THIS Rule is directed against a concurrent order of the two Courts below, allowing the landlord opposite party's application for eviction of the petitioner on the allegations inter alia that the petitioner was a thika tenant under him, who had forfeited his tenancy right under an appropriate notice of ejectment and had also no protection under the Calcutta Thika Tenancy Act, which governed the instant case.

( 2 ) THE eviction, was sought for on various grounds namely, (1) on the ground of default in payment of rent; (2) on the ground of the landlord's reasonable requirement of the disputed holding for development purposes; and (3) on the ground that the tenant petitioner was guilty of unlawful subletting and failure to occupy the major portion of the same.

( 3 ) THE landlord's case was that the petitioner's tenancy had been duly determined by an appropriate notice of ejectment, which had been duly served upon the petitioner, and that, because of the above grounds, the petitioner had forfeited its claim of protection under the Calcutta Thika Tenancy Act.

( 4 ) THE landlord's claim was opposed and objected to by the petitioner, who contended inter alia that its tenancy, if any, under the opposite party was not a Thika Tenancy but had to be governed by other Acts. There was an extreme contention that the petitioner was not the tenant under the opposite party. It was also alleged that the petitioner was not guilty of defaults, so as to be liable to ejectment; that the landlord's case of reasonable requirement was untrue; and that the petitioner was not guilty, also, of any subletting and not certainly of subletting to the extent that it failed to occupy the major portion of the disputed holding.

( 5 ) ALL the above objections were overruled by the two tribunals below and the landlord opposite party's claim for ejectment was allowed. Against this concurrent order, the present Rule was obtained by the petitioner.

( 6 ) FOR our present purpose, it will not be necessary to go into the grounds under the Calcutta Thika Tenancy Act, as, in our view, the opposite party's claim for eviction, in the instant case, would fail on the ground of insufficiency and invalidity of the notice of ejectment and on the further ground that there has been no due or proper service of any notice of ejectment according to law. This, however, in the circumstances of this case, as we shall indicate presently, must be made on terms and we will specify the terms, on which we will be inclined to interfere in the instant case, even though the petitioner would otherwise be entitled to a reversal of the orders of the two tribunals below.

( 7 ) ON the question of notice, it appears that the notice, given in the instant case, complied with the provision of one month's notice but did not comply with a six months' notice, as found by the learned Lower Appellate Tribunal. That tribunal, also, appears to be of the view that the tenancy in this case was for a manufacturing purpose. That view seems to be correct on the facts before us. But the lower appellate tribunal was of the opinion that, having regard to the provisions of Section 4 of the Calcutta Thika Tenancy Act, one month's notice would be enough even for a manufacturing tenancy, which was governed by the Calcutta Thika Tenancy Act; in other words, the learned lower appellate tribunal was of the opinion that the Calcutta Thika Tenancy Act, while providing, in Section 4, for a one month's notice, was overriding the corresponding provision under the Transfer of Property Act, which required, in the case of manufacturing leases, six months' notice; in other cases, fifteen days'. While, to tha extent, the latter cases are concerned, the view may be substantially correct inasmuch as the notice for the lesser period, required under the Transfer of Property Act in these cases, would be sufficiently substituted by the notice for the longer period, as provided in Section 4 of the Calcutta Thi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document