The notice of demand from the provident fund authority touched on the real question in controversy between the parties, and the proviso to Order VI Rule 17 did not bar in filing of the application seeking amendment of the plaint.

JUDGMENT :

DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.

Heard B. J. Ghosh, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. K. Bhattacharjee, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent.

2. This is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dtd. 12/4/2018 passed in Misc. (J) Case No.60/2017 arising out of Title Suit No.76/2009 whereby the application seeking amendment of the plaint was rejected by the Trial Court.

3. For the purpose of appreciating the perspective in which the impugned order was passed by the Trial Court, it would be relevant to take note of background to the application filed seeking amendment. The plaintiff had entered into a registered Deed of Lease dtd. 12/4/2004 with the defendant whereby in consideration to the payment to be made, the Tea Garden viz. Puranimati Tea Estate was leased out to the respondent w.e.f. 2/12/2003 for a term of 99 years. There are various terms and conditions mentioned in the said Lease Agreement. For the purpose of the instant application Clause - 2(VI) and Clause - 2(VIII) being relevant are quoted hereinbelow:

"2(VI). That the LESSEE shall not be liable for previous and/or existing liability of the LESSOR but shall be liable for all liabilities from the date of commencement of lease as mentioned herein above.

2(VIII). That the LESSEE shall comply with the requirements of the law for the time being in force regarding the factories, tea plantation Rules and Regulations and also shall comply with the provisions of labour laws in respect of tea garden etc."

4. From a perusal of the above two clauses, it is apparent that the lessee i.e. the respondent herein would not be liable for the previous and/or existing liability of the lessor but would be liable for all liabilities from the date of commencement of the lease as mentioned. In Clause - 2(VIII) it has been mentioned that the lessee i.e. the respondent shall comply with the requirements of the law for the time being in force regarding the factories, tea plantation Rules and Regulations and also shall comply with the provisions of labour laws in respect of tea garden etc.

5. Certain disputes and differences arose between the petitioner and the respondent herein for which a suit was filed before the Court of the Munsiff No.1, Jorhat seeking eviction, recovery of khas possession, recovery of arrear rent, compensation and permanent injunction which was registered and numbered as Title Suit No.76/09. A perusal of the said plaint would go to show that the allegations made in the plaint was that the defendant has violated the terms and conditions of the registered Deed of Lease dtd. 12/4/2004 for which eviction was sought for by the plaintiff along with other consequential reliefs. The defendant thereupon filed written statement denying any violation to the terms and conditions of the lease as well as also denying the case of the plaintiff. It further appears that issues have already been framed and amongst the many issues framed, one of the issues so framed was as to "Whether the defendant have violated the terms and conditions of the agreement?" Thereupon, the plaintiff have already adduced the evidence and the plaintiff witnesses have already been cross-examined.

6. In the meantime on account of various proceedings being initiated before this Court, the defendant's evidence could not be adduced till date. Be that as it may, on 14/6/2017, the plaintiff/petitioner received a notice of demand dtd. 13/6/2017 from the Recovery Officer, Assam Tea Employees Provident Fund Organizaton, Jorhat wherein it has been mentioned that there has been nonpayment of Provident Fund Contribution, Provident Fund Administrative Charges, Deposit Linked Insurance Contribution, Deposit Linked Insurance Administrative Charges during the period when the defendant/respondent herein is running the Tea Garden on lease.

7. On coming to learn about the said notice of demand, the plaintiff filed an application under Order VI Rule