Summary
The Court held that under Section 7 of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 a tenant seeking protection against eviction must pay or deposit the admitted arrears of rent, and in case of dispute file the application for determination of rent together with the deposit, within one month of service of summons; these requirements are mandatory, the proviso to Section 7(2) permitting a one-time extension of up to two months applies only to payment of the amount determined by the Civil Judge, and Section 5 of the Limitation Act cannot extend the shorter period prescribed by the Act. The tenant's belated application without any deposit was rightly rejected.
Issues
- Whether applications under Sections 7(1) and 7(2) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 filed by a tenant after the statutory period of thirty days, without deposit of rent, could be entertained with the aid of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
- Whether the proviso to Section 7(2) of the Act, permitting a single extension of time not exceeding two months, applies to the deposit and application required under Section 7(1) and the first part of Section 7(2).
- Whether compliance with the time limits for payment or deposit of rent and filing of the application under Sections 7(1) and 7(2) is mandatory or directory.
Provisions considered
- Section 7(1), (2), (3) and (4), West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997The Court read sub-section (1) as requiring payment or deposit of all admitted arrears with interest within one month of service of summons, and sub-section (2), in case of dispute, as requiring deposit of the admitted amount within the same period together with an application for determination of rent; 'together' means conjointly, so the application must be filed within the same thirty days. The repeated use of 'shall', coupled with the consequence in sub-section (3) of striking out the defence, makes these requirements mandatory, while 'may' in the proviso confers a discretion to extend time only for payment of the amount determined under the latter part of sub-section (2). (¶¶ 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 22, 23, 24, 28, 29, 32, 33, 35)
- Section 40, West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997Section 40 makes the Limitation Act, 1963 applicable to proceedings and appeals under the Act only subject to the Act's own provisions relating to limitation; where the Act prescribes a shorter period, the Limitation Act cannot be used to expand it. (¶¶ 19, 20, 21, 35)
- Section 5, Limitation Act, 1963Following Bijay Kumar Singh and Debasish Paul, the Court held that the tenant cannot take recourse to Section 5 to condone delay, since what is required is not merely an application but deposit of the admitted arrears within the time fixed by the Act. (¶¶ 17, 18, 20, 21, 30)
- Computation of time, General Clauses Act, 1897Applying the General Clauses Act, the thirty-day period ran from receipt of summons on 29.09.2022 and ended on 28.10.2022, after the Durga Puja vacation closed; the deposit and application therefore had to be made immediately on reopening, but were filed 17 days late on 14.11.2022. (¶ 34)
Held
- To obtain protection against eviction under Section 7 of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 the tenant must, within one month of service of summons, pay or deposit the admitted arrears of rent with interest and thereafter deposit the monthly rent; where the rent is disputed, the admitted amount must be deposited within the same period together with an application for determination of rent, and no deposit is to be accepted without such application. (¶¶ 12, 13, 14, 17)
- The Limitation Act, 1963 applies to proceedings under the Act by virtue of Section 40 only subject to the Act's own limitation provisions; where a lesser period is prescribed, Section 5 of the Limitation Act cannot be invoked to extend it. A tenant who has neither deposited the admitted rent nor filed the application within thirty days cannot claim the protection of Section 7. (¶¶ 17, 18, 19, 20, 21)
- The word 'shall', used in Sections 7(1)(a), (b), (c) and the first part of 7(2) for payment or deposit of rent and filing of the application, is mandatory, especially because Section 7(3) specifies the consequence of non-compliance, namely striking out of the defence; the word 'may' in the proviso to Section 7(2) confers only a discretion to extend time. (¶¶ 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29)
- The proviso to Section 7(2) permitting a single extension of time not exceeding two months applies only to payment of the amount specified in the Civil Judge's order of determination under the latter part of Section 7(2); it does not extend the initial period for deposit under Section 7(1) or for deposit and application under the first part of Section 7(2). The legislature provided no extension for Section 7(1) and intended none for the corresponding part of Section 7(2). (¶¶ 28, 29, 32, 33, 35)
- The tenant's reliance on paragraphs 17 to 19 of Debasish Paul was repelled; that decision itself held that the Limitation Act cannot be used to extend a lesser period prescribed by the Act, and Section 7(3) covers default under Section 7(1), the former part of Section 7(2) and the latter part of Section 7(2) alike. (¶¶ 30, 31, 33)
- On the facts, the thirty-day period from service of summons on 29.09.2022 expired on 28.10.2022, after the court vacation ended, so the deposit and application ought to have been made immediately on reopening; the application filed on 14.11.2022 without any deposit attracted the consequence under Section 7(3), and the extension under the proviso was unavailable before the rent-determination stage. (¶¶ 34, 35)
Result
Appeal dismissed; orders of the Small Causes Court and the High Court rejecting the tenant's application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act maintained.