- (1.) The two petitioners before me, Trilok Nath Lall and Kedar Nath Lall, are the tenants of 73 Tarak Pramanik Road on a rent of Rs. 140 a month. For November and December 1958, they deposited Rs. 280 with the controller on the allegation that their landlord, then one Radhakrishna Khattray, had not accepted the rent, though tendered. An allegation as this was accompanied by an application and supported by an affidavit, as it had to be under Section 21, Sub-section 8, of the Premises Tenancy Act, 12 of 1956. Such deposit was made and affidavit sworn on or about January 17, 1959. The landlord received the notice of the deposit on February 9, 1959, and applied under Sub-section 5 of Section 21 for withdrawal of the same. He did a little more too. At the time of so applying for withdrawal, he complained to the controller as under: "The petitioners have been in arrears of rent from March 1958. Their tenancy was, therefore, determined by a notice dated November 17, 1958, asking them to quit by the following December's end. More, an action in ejectment was raised against them in the City Civil Court, being suit No. 169 of 1959. The allegation made in the petitioners' application and the supporting affidavit dated January 17, 1959, that rent was tendered to him and was refused is "entirely false", and false to their knowledge. In fact, no rent was tendered to him ever." So, levy of a fine upon them and a suitable compensation to him out of the fine realized were prayed for under Section 21, Sub-section 8.
(2.) By an order dated August 5, 1959, the learned controller found as a fact that the statement of the petitioners in their application and affidavit about the tender and refusal of rent for November and December 1958 was untrue, levied a fine of Rs. 30 upon them and directed payment to the landlord of Rupees 15 as compensation out of the fine realized. The tenants, the petitioners before me, appealed. On July 30, 1960, a learned judge, Calcutta Small Cause Court, upheld the finding of the controller and dismissed the appeal. The tenants moved this Court on August 9, 1960, and obtained a rule in which I am rendering judgment now.
(3.) During the carriage of this revisional petition, Radha Krishna Khattry, the landlord and the sole opposite party, died and has since been substituted by his heirs.;