Summary
Tenants facing eviction for rent arrears sought determination of the amount without depositing admitted rent. The Court held that the 1997 West Bengal tenancy statute required compliance with both the deposit and application requirements within the prescribed period. Its limited extension provision differed materially from the earlier statute, and section 5 of the Limitation Act could not cure the default.
Issues
- Whether the requirements of section 7(2) were mandatory and delay could be condoned under the Limitation Act.
Provisions considered
- Section 7, West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997The prescribed deposits, application and limited extension constituted the statutory mechanism for protection against eviction for rent default. (¶¶ 10, 19, 20, 21)
Held
- Where rent or the arrears period is disputed, the tenant must deposit admitted arrears and apply for determination within one month of service of summons, or appearance without summons. The deposit and application are concurrent statutory preconditions. (¶¶ 19, 20, 21)
- After determination, the specified amount must be paid within one month. The court may extend time only once and by no more than two months. The requirements are mandatory, with default attracting the statutory consequence of striking out the defence against possession and continuing the suit. (¶¶ 10, 20, 21)
- Decisions under the 1956 Act concerning broader powers to extend time did not govern the materially different 1997 scheme. Section 5 of the Limitation Act was unavailable because compliance required the admitted-rent deposit as well as an application. (¶¶ 11, 18, 21, 22)
Result
The appeals were dismissed, affirming the High Court’s interference with the tenants’ applications. The Trial Court was directed to proceed with the suits in accordance with law.