Rent includes all payments agreed by the tenant to the landlord for the use and occupation of the premises.

( 1 ) BOTH the appeals were heard together as common questions of fact and law are involved.

( 2 ) THE subject matter of challenge is a judgment and order dated 22nd May, 2003, passed by a learned single Judge of the First Court holding, inter alia, that Municipal Rates and Taxes as well as Commercial Surcharge and parking charges do not form part of the rent and the respondent is not liable to pay the same with the rent.

( 3 ) THE learned Judge in the judgment, under appeal, has recorded that at the ad interim stage, by an order dated 4th May, 2001, the Court directed the tenant to deposit admitted arrears of monthly rent in twenty equal monthly instalments along with the current rent to be paid on or before 7th of each month. The said order was passed in a suit filed by the plaintiff/appellant for a decree of eviction of the sole defendant on the ground of the defendant's failure to pay monthly rent, car parking charges and the consolidated rates and taxes and commercial surcharges in respect of the tenancy. The tenancy consists of a portion of the 7th floor, the entire 8th floor of premises No. 24, Park Street, Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as the 'said premises' ).

( 4 ) THE learned Judge, after considering facts and circumstances of the case and the decisions cited before His Lordship, held that the agreement between the parties will determine the quantum of rent and in the instant case, the agreement does not mention that the rent will be inclusive of such charges. As such, the learned Judge directed the petitioner to pay the rent month by month @ Rs. 1,78,128. 39 paise after enhancement of the same in accordance with the agreement.

( 5 ) THE learned counsel appearing for the appellant, assailed the said judgment on various grounds and it was urged that the learned Judge of the First Court erred both on facts and in law. The learned counsel submitted that the genesis of the dispute arose out of a letter dated 15th March, 2001 written on behalf of the appellant in answer to the letter dated 12th March, 2001 written by the respondents. In the letter dated 15th March written by Celica Developers on behalf of the appellant, it was made clear that in spite of the letter dated 16th February, 2001 written by the appellant returning therein the cheques of the respondents towards rent for the earlier period, respondents have again tendered the monthly rent which does not include Municipal rates and taxes and commercial surcharge and car parking charges. In the said letter it was made clear that the suit has been filed for eviction of the respondent. In view of the said suit the appellants were unable to accept the cheques as tendered. The learned counsel submitted that in the plaint itself the said dispute has been highlighted in paragraph 19 where it has been stated that the last rent which was paid by the respondent was inclusive of Municipal rates and taxes and car parking charges and the same was paid by the respondent in respect of the tenanted premises to Magma Leasing Ltd. through City Bank and the component of the said rate of rent was mentioned as follows: ? (a)basic rent. . . Rs. 1,54,894. 26 (Upto June, 1999) (b)car parking charges. . . Rs. 1,983. 75 (c)municipal taxes. . . Rs. 1,14,848. 00 (Upto March, 1998 quarter)total : rs. 2,71,725. 91?

( 6 ) FROM a letter dated 24th April, 2001 written by the respondents to the Assessor/collector (South) of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation, it was made clear by them that in respect of the 7th and 8th floor of the tenanted premises the rent which was paid included the Municipal rates and taxes. As quarterly rates and taxes the amount which was mentioned in the said letter dated 24th April, 2001, was Rs. 1,14,848/ -. The same amount tallies with the particulars given in paragraph 19 of the plaint and which has been set out hereinbefore.

( 7 ) THE said letter dated 24th April, 2001 was issued by the respondents in answer to the letter dated 20th April, 2