Ct. 07.05 C.O. 3755 of 2024 No.

29 2025 Bd Minati Karar & Ors.

Vs.

Tapas Kumar Chatterjee Ms. Aditi Kumar …For the Petitioners Mr. Saurav Chaudhury …For the Opposite Party Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the order dated 12.09.2024 passed by learned Additional District Judge, 13th Court, Alipore in Ejectment Appeal 35 of 2018 arising out of Ejectment Suit No. 60 of 2013, the present application has been preferred by the plaintiff/landlord/petitioners.

By the order impugned learned court below has rejected the plaintiff/petitioner’s application under section 7(3) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997, (in short Act of 1997) observing that the plaintiff never challenged the order dated 2.2.2010 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) 3rd Court, Alipore, while disposing the application under section 7(2) of the said Act of 1997. He made further observation that application under section 7(3) of the Act of 1997, which was filed before the Appellate Court is not tenable, since such application is required to be filed before the trial court. Accordingly, Court below had given liberty to the defendant/tenant/opposite party herein to deposit arrear rent from July 2023 to January 2024 along with interest within one month.

From the above-mentioned order No. 9 dated 2.2.2010 it appears that the defendant/tenant after appearance filed an application under section 5 of the Limitation Act, along with his application under section 7(2) of the Act of 1997, and it further discloses that in the said applications defendant admitted due arrear of rent from March 2007 to May 2009 @ Rs. 250/- per month, though he did not pay the admitted arrear amount within the statutory period for some reasons and for which he filed another application under section 5 of the Limitation Act, for condonation of delay, which the court below allowed without assigning any reason.

When this was brought to the notice of Court below, he observed that petitioner cannot have any right to challenge the aforesaid order dated 02.02.2010 after a period of 14 years. In Bijay Kumar Singh & Ors. –vs- Amit Kumar Chamariya & Anr. reported in (2019) 10 SCC 660 while interpreting section 7 of the Act of 1997 held that if the tenant fails to deposit admitted arrears of rent within one month of receipt of summon or within one month of appearance without summons and also fails to make an application for determination of the disputed amount of rate of rent and the period of arrears and the subsequent non-payment of determining of the arrears of rent, will entail the eviction of tenant. The relevant paragraph 19, 20 and 21 may be quoted below:

19. Sub-section (1) of Section 7 of the Act relieves the tenant from the ejectment on the ground of non-payment of arrears of rent if he pays to the landlord or deposits it with the Civil Judge all arrears of rent, calculated at the rate at which it was last paid and up to the end of the month previous to that in which the payment is made together with interest at the rate of ten per cent per annum. Such payment or deposit shall be made within one month of the service of summons on the tenant or, where he appears in the suit without the summons being served upon him, within one month of his appearance.

20. Therefore, sub-section (1) deals with the payment of arrears of rent when there is no dispute about the rate of rent or the period of arrears of rent. Sub-section (2) of Section 7 of the Act comes into play if there is dispute as to the amount of rent including the period of arrears payable by the tenant. In that situation, the tenant is obliged to apply within time as specified in sub-section (1) that is within one month of the receipt of summons or within one month of appearance before the court to deposit with the Civil Judge the amount admitted by him to be due. The tenant is also required to file an application for determination of the rent payable. Such deposit is not to be accepted, unless it is accompanied by a