- (1.) This is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India wherein the present petitioner, who is the defendant / tenant in Title Suit No. 698 of 2010 now pending before the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 6th Court at Alipore, has challenged the order no. 28 dated 13.11.2013 as passed by the said learned Trial Court. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. The certified copy of the order is a part of this application.
(2.) It is submission of the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that no notice for termination of the tenancy was given under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act as claimed by the plaintiff of that suit and the findings of the learned Trial Court "this is a suit under the Transfer of Property Act where a notice under Section 106 has been served upon the defendant" is wrong and thereby the learned Trial Court prejudged the issue.
(3.) It is also his submission that under Section 114 of the Transfer of Property Act, his client is entitled to deposit the said amount as per challan. Learned Counsel took me to the said provisions, which runs as follows :- "Sec. 114 Relief against forfeiture for non-payment of rent Where a lease of immovable property has determined by forfeiture for non-payment of rent, and the lessor sues to eject the lessee, if, at the hearing of the suit, the lessee pays or tenders to the lessor the rent in arrear, together with interest thereon and his full costs of the suit, or gives such security as the Court thinks sufficient for making such payment within fifteen days, the Court may, in lieu of making a decree for ejectment, pass an order relieving the lessee against the forfeiture ; and thereupon the lessee shall hold the property leased as if the forfeiture had not occurred.";