The court has the jurisdiction to review rent in the interest of social justice and fair play, even if it means departing from the strict letters of the law.

BHAGABATI PRASAD BANERJEE, J.

( 1 ) THE Division Bench of this court earlier passed an order for the purpose of assessing the reasonable rent payable in respect of the flat which is in occupation of Shri Jagdish Prasad Banshal. The said flat consists of 1250 Sq. ft. carpet area more or less together with open terrace lying and situated on the ground floor (front portion) of premises No. 127a, Park Street, Calcutta. The tenancy of Shri Jagdish Kumar Banshal was entered into by Shri Gopal Chokhany as guardian appointed under Order dated 19/05/1983 passed by the Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Prativa Banerjee in Matter No. G-5 of 1982 (Gopal Chokhany v. Basant Kumar Chokhany) at a monthly rental of Rs. 4250. 00. At the time of induction of such tenancy a non-refundable security deposit of Rs. 60,000. 00 was also paid by the said tenant. The Division Bench intended to increase the rent from Rs. 4250. 00 under a peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and for that purpose assessment of payable was made by M/s. Talbert and Co. who have assessed the valuation of rent for the said premises at Rs. 12,000. 00 per month. The area under occupation is 1250 sq. ft. in a most sophisticated and commercial place centered practically at the heart of the city of Calcutta. The premises in question, is situated at Park Street. This proposed enhancement was sought to be opposed by the tenant Jagdish Prosad Bansal by filing an affidavit, stating, inter alia, for cancellation and/or quashing the said report of assessment made by Talbert and Co. made in 1982. A prayer was made on behalf of the said tenant to put in Grill Barricade in the front side Verandah for exclusive use and for protection and to make better use of the shop-room of the said premises which was for the purpose of his commercial purpose and that the main ground to oppose such an attempt was taken relying upon the deed of agreement that there was no provision of enhancement of rent. One of the important terms of the agreement was that "the landlord will not be entitled to eject the tenant on the ground of building and rebuilding purpose and for his own use and occupation. " Or in other words, it appears that the tenancy was granted granting protection to the tenant against the eviction on that ground travelling beyond the provision of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956.

( 2 ) MR. Sanjoy Bhattacharjee, learned advocate appearing for the tenant submitted that the said rental valuation report made by M/s. Talbert and Co. be set aside and also made a prayer for adjustment of the amount paid in terms of the said agreement as also adjustment of the sum spent by the tenant for renovation of the portion let out made for commercial use. Mr. Bhattacharjee also submitted that this court has no jurisdiction to accept the report of the Talbert and Co. and to enhance and that enhancement of rent can only be made by Rent Controller in accordance with the provision of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act and that the enhancement cannot be made more than 10% by the Rent Controller. This court requested Mr. Bhattacharjee to take instruction from his client whether the tenant was voluntarily aggreable to make some increase in the rent considering the peculiar and unprecendented nature of the case. In a suit for appointment of guardian and managing the estate for the benefit of children, particularly to say 4 daughters and one son out of which one daughter has just attained the majority. The daughters and son are all students and that it was found by the court that the children were not safe in the hands of the parents and they were not looked after and maintained by the parents even though there is valuable property which fetched some income. It appears that Miss Suchanda Mukherjee is the Special Officer who acted as Guardian for all the four children and very recently the eldest daughter, Joyshree alias Doli Chokhani has just attained the majority. Miss Mukherjee was the guardian of all these chil

Click Here to Read the rest of this document