The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of Section 3(c) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 and the applicability of the 1997 Act to lease deeds, particularly in cases of sooner determination under Section 111(g) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882.

JUDGMENT :

1. The four matters were taken up for analogous hearing since they arise from suits between the same parties, being heard together in the court below, and in view of the impugned orders in all the revisional applications being exactly similar.

2. The brief background of the case is that the plaintiff filed four suits against the opposite party, all on the ground of forfeiture as contemplated in Section 111 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. In each of the said suits, initially applications were filed by the defendant under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for rejection of the plaints. The trial court rejected such applications under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, on which revisional applications were preferred before this court and a co-ordinate bench was pleased to allow the said revisions, thereby rejecting the plaints filed in the said suits.

3. A subsequent attempt to have the said order of the co-ordinate bench reviewed, met with failure, upon which separate special leave petitions were preferred before the Supreme Court, which were disposed of by holding that the question involved in those appeals was whether the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1997 Act") or the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1882 Act") applied. It was further held that the said dispute could be resolved by framing an issue by the trial court on the said point and by adjudicating the same as a preliminary issue. Accordingly, the appeals were disposed of by directing the trial court to frame the issue relating to maintainability of the suits and applicability of the enactments as mentioned in the judgment of the Supreme Court and to decide the same in accordance with law as a preliminary issue.

4. Pursuant to the said order of the Supreme Court, the impugned orders were passed upon framing of the following two issues:

1. Is the suit triable under the provisions of the W.B.P.T Act, 1997 or the Transfer of Property Act, 1882?

2. Whether the suit is maintainable as framed or at all?

5. The trial court, in all the four suits, ultimately answered the said two issues in favour of the plaintiff, holding that the lease deeds were executed on November 20, 1992 for a period of 99 years and the 1997 Act came into force on July 10, 2001, that is, the lease deeds were much earlier than the enforcement of the 1997 Act and that there was no express word in the 1997 Act, with effect from July 10, 2001 that all rights accrued by any party from any prevailing law would be extinguished since the 1997 Act came into force on July 10, 2001. Accordingly, it was held by the trial court that the said four suits were squarely governed by the 1882 Act and not under the 1997 Act and in view of such factual aspect, the suits were perfectly maintainable.

6. The moot question which falls for consideration in the present revisional applications is, whether the premises-in-question is governed by the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 or the Transfer of Property Act, 1882.

7. Learned counsel for the defendant/petitioner argues that Section 3 of the 1997 Act contains the exemptions from the applicability of the said Act. Section 3(c) provides that any tenancy, where the lease with due consent of the tenant has been registered under the Registration Act, 1908 after the commencement of the 1997 Act, and the fact of such consent has been recorded in the instrument so registered, shall be exempted from the 1997 Act.

8. The said provision was modified by the amendment effected by the 2002 Amendment Act, with retrospective effect from July 10, 2001. In the interregnum, the provision stood as follows:

"(c) Any tenancy where the lease has been registered under the Registration Act, 1908 before or after the commencement of this Act, the same would be exempted from the 1997 Act."

9. In the present case, the leases were registered on November 20, 1992 and were given effect from Novemb