The Munsif took up for companysideration the application under Section 14 4 and the additional issue No.
After the declaration of tenancy under Section 16 3 , Roy Choudhury was permitted to amend his written statement in the suit by adding a paragraph questioning the relationship of landlord and tenant between the respondent and himself.
The material facts leading to the impugned order are these.
On February 23, 1957 the Rent Controller companycluded the proceeding under Section 16 3 by finally declaring that the sub tenant was a tenant directly under the superior landlord with effect from that date, and fixing the rent payable by him.
On July 31, 1956 the Rent Controller recorded a finding on this application that Roy Choudhury was entitled to the declaration asked for overruling the objections raised by the respondent.
In the meantime, on August 21, 1956 the respondent had made an application under Section 14 4 of the 1950 Act in the suit for eviction which was pending.
On January 24, 1965 Roy Choudhury died and the present appellants were substituted in his place in the suit as his heirs and legal representatives.
On this application the Munsif on September 26, 1956 directed the appellant to deposit a certain sum as arrears of rent and also rent month by month at the rate of Rs.
The appeal preferred by the respondent from this order was dismissed by the appellate authority.
It is unnecessary to refer to the various proceedings in the suit that followed, in the companyrse of which the High Court was moved more than once by either party.
9, which was as follows Has the alleged relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties been determined by final orders dated 31 7 56 and 23 2 57 passed by the R. C. Rent Controller Calcutta in Case No.
The propriety of this order is challenged by the tenant defendants.
The appeal turns on the answer to this question.
243B of 1956 ?
On November 1, 1965 the Munsif framed an additional issue, being issue No.
Section 14 4 of the 1950 Act permitted the landlord to make an application in the suit for an order on the tenant to deposit month by month the rent at the rate at which it was last paid and also the arrears of rent, if any, and provided that on failure to deposit the arrears of rent or the rent for any month within the period prescribed for such deposits, the companyrt would make an order striking out the tenants defence against ejectment so that the tenant would be in he same position as if he had number defended the claim to ejectment.
Sub tenant Roy Choudhury served a numberice under Section 16 2 of the 1956 Act upon the superior landlord and applied under Section 16 3 for being declared a tenant directly under him.
The respondent was a tenant of premises No.
The plaintiff moved the High Court in revision against this order.
17/1E Gopal Nagar Road, Alipore, Calcutta, and his landlord was one Jagabandhu Saha, the owner of the house, Dilip Narayan Roy Chowdhury was a sub tenant under the respondent in respect of the ground floor flat paying a monthly rent of Rs.
The additional issue No.
C. Gupta, J. This appeal by special leave is directed against a Judgment of the Calcutta High Court setting aside in revision the finding of the trial companyrt on the issue whether the relationship of landlord and tenant subsisted between the parties in a suit for ejectment.
The issue which arises on the interaction of two statutes, the West Bengal Premises Rent Control Temporary Provisions Act, 1950 and the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956, which repeals the earlier Act but keeps it alive for proceedings pending on the date of repeal, involves the question, is the right companyferred on the sub tenant by the 1956 Act of being declared a tenant directly under the superior landlord available to a sub tenant against whom a suit for ejectment was pending when that Act came into force ?
9 together and by his order dated February 20, 1967 found that the Rent Controller had jurisdiction to pass the order under Section 16 3 declaring the defendant to be a direct tenant under the superior landlord, and that the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties ceased by virtue of the order made under Section 16 3 .
