B.K. Sharma, J.

1. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction has been filed in respect of the order dated 29.8.2011 passed by the learned Munsiff No. 2, Jorhat in Misc. G) Case No. 27/2011 arising out of T.S. No. 24/2008, by which the prayer of the defendant in the suit to stay the proceeding in the suit has been rejected. The respondent herein as the plaintiff has instituted the Title Suit being T.S. No. 24/2008 against the petitioner as the defendant for recovery of khas and vacant possession of the suit room and also for recovery of arrear compensation of Rs. 48,000/-. In paragraph 4, 5 and 11, of the plaint, it has been stated thus :

4. That as per terms of the agreement the monthly rent of the suit room was fixed at Rs. 4,000/- (rupees four thousand) only out of which Rs. 3,000/- (rupees three thousand) only be the clear rent and Rs. 1,000/- (rupees one thousand) only be the service charge for maintenance of the property. It is also agreed that besides paying the rent as stipulated, the defendant is also liable to pay a sum of Rs. 489/- (rupees four hundred eighty nine) only per month to the plaintiff for payment of Service Tax with effect from June, 2007. The rent is payable in advance within 10th day of every month.

5. That the agreement further stipulates that if the defendant wants to renew the agreement for a further period then the rent will be Rs. 9,000/- (rupees nine thousand) only per month for the next one year i.e. from 1.4.08 to 31.3.09 with other terms and condition as mutually agreed upon between the parties.

11. That as per terms of the tenancy agreement executed between the parties, in case of renewal of the tenancy agreement the rent of the suit room would be Rs. 9,000/- (rupees nine thousand) only from the month of April, 2008. And as such, the plaintiff is entitled to and claim a sum of Rs. 9,000/- (rupees nine thousand) only per month as compensation for illegal and unauthorized occupation of the suit room by the defendant on and from 1.4.2008 till the recovery of khas and vacant possession of the suit room.

2. In the written statement filed by the defendant/petitioner, the above quoted paragraphs have been responded to as follows :

7. That in answer to para 4 of the plaint it is amply made clear that monthly clear rent is Rs. 3,000/- p.m. and Rs. 1,000/- is service charge. In spite of such fixation of monthly rent the defendant to avoid conflict with the plaintiff-landlord and on his pressure used to pay him regularly Rs. 4,000/- as rent. The landlord-plaintiff has no right under law to realize extra amount of Rs. 489/- per month as service tax from the defendant. The tenancy of the defendant under the plaintiff in respect of the suit room continued as statutory tenant and also under other provision of law. That as per the provisions of the Assam Urban Areas Rent Control Act, 1972, the plaintiff is not entitled under the law to realize an amount of Rs. 489/- (Rupees four hundred and eighty nine) only as service tax and hence the defendant denies the averment of the plaintiff that the defendant is liable to pay service tax with effect from June, 2007 as the same is not tenable in the eye of law. The answering defendant further states that under the Assam Urban Areas Rent Control Act, 1972, there is no provision for service tax.

8. That as that defendant was in need of a tenanted premises like the present suit premises for carrying on her business and as there was dearth of such premises so the plaintiff landlord used pressure to sign in the agreement which contained onerous terms not permissible even under law. That non implementation of the clause of agreement as detailed in para-5 of the plaint by this defendant cannot lead to her ejectment from the suit room. Her tenancy never ceased to exist because of the non implementation of that clause of the agreement. The so cal