- (1.) Dr. Lalit Kumar Chakraborty filed a suit in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Dibrugarh, in the year 2000, seeking the eviction of the defendants therefrom. The trial court dismissed the above suit on 23.02.2005. The judgment rendered by the trial court, was assailed before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Dibrugarh, by way of an appeal. The said appeal was allowed on 22.08.2008. The defendants in the suit assailed the judgment dated 22.08.2008, before the Gauhati High Court by preferring C.R.P. No.417/2008. The High Court accepted the above petition, on 19.05.2015. A challenge is now raised against the above order dated 19.05.2015, passed by the High Court, through the instant special leave petition.
(2.) Leave granted.
(3.) Even though eviction of the respondent-tenant herein, was sought on various grounds, we shall deal with the singular ground of non-payment of rent. The relevant statutory provision, which was relied upon by the learned counsel representing the appellant-landlord, was Section 5(1)(e) of the Assam Urban Areas Rent Control Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the "1972 Act"). It is also relevant to mention, that reliance was also placed on Section 5(4) of the above Act. An extract of Section 5 of the 1972 Act, as is relevant for the adjudication of the present case, is reproduced below : "5. (1) No order or decree for the recovery of possession of any house shall be made or executed by any Court so long as the tenant pays rent to the full extent allowable under this Act and performs the conditions of the tenancy : Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall apply in a suit or proceedings for eviction of the tenant from the house:- (a) ..... (b) ..... (c) ..... (d) ..... (e) Where the tenant has not paid the rent lawfully due from him in respect of the house within a fortnight of its falling due." 4. The claim of the appellant, is based on express pleadings in the suit. Accordingly, paragraphs 3, 4 and 6 of the suit, which are relevant for the question being debated, are extracted hereunder : "3. That on or about 30/40 years back, the plaintiff rented out a house premises, more fully described in the schedule herein below to M/s. M. Ahmed Bhiyan and Co. on monthly rent @ L 90/- P.M. payable to him on the 1st week of each succeeding English Calender Month. Md. Abdul Hussain Bhuyan son of late Noor Md. Bhuyan is now the owner Cum Proprietor of M/s. M. Ahmed Bhuyan and Co. and for that, he used to pay the monthly House rent to the plaintiff in a very irregular way. ;