Siddhartha Chattopadhyay, J.

Feeling aggrieved with the order dated 15.05.2015 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 1st Court, Asansol in connection with Title Suit No. 4 of 2007, the tenant/petitioner has filed this revisional application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking setting aside the impugned order.

2. According to the revisionist the learned Court below has failed to appreciate the law of limitation and thus came to a wrong finding. The revisionist contended that the learned Court below has failed to appreciate that the period of alleged default was disputed by the petitioner and it was the duty of the Court below to assess the arrear rent. According to him, due to absence of any order regarding arrear rent, he could not comply with the provisions of Section 7 (1) and Section 7 (2) of W.B.P.T. Act 1997. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party landlord contended that the landlord tenancy relation and also the rate of rent were not disputed. The revisionist wanted to say that when the landlord/opposite party refused to take the rent from her, she had sent the admitted rent by money order and two occasions the lan