The deposit of admitted rent is a mandatory condition precedent for a tenant to maintain an application for the determination of rent. Failure to comply with this requirement within the statutory timeframe renders the defense liable to be struck out under the relevant tenancy law.

JUDGMENT :

OM NARAYAN RAI, J.

1. Since these two applications under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assail two interlocutory orders passed in the same suit (i.e. Ejectment Suit No. 308 of 2025) instituted by the opposite party against the petitioner, therefore, the same have been heard together and are being disposed of by a common order.

2. CO 369 of 2026 is directed against an order dated January 16, 2026 passed by the learned Chief Judge, Presidency Small Causes Court at Calcutta in Ejectment Suit No. 308 of 2025 whereby an application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereafter “the Code”) filed by the petitioner has been rejected. By the said order the Learned Trial Court has also struck out the petitioner’s defence by invoking the provisions of Section 7(3) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 (hereafter “the 1997 Act”) upon observing that the petitioner’s application under Section 7(2) of the 1997 Act was no longer maintainable as the petitioner had failed to comply with the requirements of Section 7(1) thereof.

3. CO 1048 of 2026 is directed against an order dated February 23, 2026 passed by the learned Judge, 3^rd Bench, Presidency Small Causes Court at Calcutta in Ejectment Suit No. 308 of 2025 whereby the petitioner’s written statement has been held to be “unnecessary and redundant” in view of the order dated January 16, 2026 whereby the petitioner’s defence had been struck out.

4. The opposite party has instituted Ejectment Suit No. 308 of 2025 praying inter alia for recovery of khas possession of the suit premises upon eviction of the petitioner therefrom.

5. The factual narration in the order dated January 16, 2026 reveals that summons was served upon the petitioner on November 20, 2025. Subsequently, on December 19, 2025, the petitioner filed two applications in the said suit- one under Section 7(1) of the 1997 Act and the other under Section 7(2) thereof.

6. The application under Section 7(1) of the 1997 Act was taken up for consideration by the learned Trial Court on the same date (i.e. on December 19, 2025) and was disposed of by an order of even date permitting the petitioner “to pay/deposit the admitted arrear of rent as prayed for, 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 @ 10% p.a., within the time frame as prescribed under the law at his own risk without prejudice to the right and contentions of the parties in accordance with law.”

7. It is the petitioner’s case that upon such order being passed, the petitioner attempted to deposit the arrears of rent along with the current rent but the relevant department of the learned Trial Court did not accept the same. Accordingly, on January 08, 2026, the petitioner made another application under Section 151 of the Code praying for a direction upon the department to receive the current rent as well as the rent-arrears in terms of the order dated December 19, 2025.

8. Such app