JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) This application is at the instance of the
plaintiff and is directed against the order dated June 21, 2010
passed by the learned Civil Judge, (Junior Division), Third Court,
Howrah in Title Suit No.128 of 2004 thereby directing the
plaintiffs to file the original rent receipts.
(2.) The short fact is that the plaintiff instituted the said suit
being Title Suit No.128 of 2004 praying for a decree of eviction
on the ground of default, reasonable requirement, sub-letting,
addition, alteration and etc. against the defendant/opposite party
before the learned Civil Judge, (Junior Division), Third Court,
Howrah. The defendant/petitioner is contesting the said suit by
filing a written statement. After appearance, the defendant filed
an application under Section 7(1) and 7(2) of the West Bengal
Premises Tenancy Act, 1997. The application under Section 7(2) of
the 1997 Act was disposed of by the learned Trial Judge and then a
revisional application was preferred by the petitioner. That
revisional application being C.O. No.533 of 2007 was disposed of
by this Bench directing the learned Trial Judge to hear out the
matter afresh within 30 days from the date of communication of the
order. Thereafter, the matter was taken up for hearing. At that
time, the defendant filed an application under Order 11 Rule 14 of
the C.P.C. directing the plaintiff to produce rent receipts for
the period from December, 1984 to December, 2004. That
application was allowed. Being aggrieved by that order, another
revisional application was preferred by the petitioner and then by
an order, the Hon'ble Court directed the trial Court to dispose of
the application under Order 11 Rule 14 of the C.P.C. filed by the
defendant expeditiously preferably within a period of six months
and thereafter, to dispose of the application under Section 7(2)
of the 1997 Act. Thereafter, the learned Trial Judge passed the
impugned order.
(3.) Upon hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and on
going through the materials on record, I find that the plaintiff
has specifically stated that the defendant was a defaulter in
payment of rent from January, 1993 to December, 2004. The
defendant contended that the rent receipts granted by the father
of the plaintiff were taken back by the plaintiff and that he did
not return the same to him. That is why, he filed the application
under Order 11 Rule 14 of the C.P.C. directing the plaintiff to
produce the rent receipts for the period from December, 1984 to
December, 2004. At the time of disposal of the revisional
application being C.O. No.3321 of 2008, the Hon'ble Justice
Biswanath Samaddar (one of the Hon'ble Judges of this Hon'ble
Court) has clearly indicated first the learned Trial Judge shall
come to a conclusion that the documents called for are in
possession or power of the plaintiff. Thereafter, he shall give
necessary direction to the plaintiff to produce the same.
Moreover, the rents due, as claimed by the plaintiff, is from
January, 1993 to December, 2004. But, inspection of those
documents was prayed for from December, 1984 to December, 2004.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.