- (1.) A common question of law of some importance has arisen in all these Rules and, as such, the Rules were heard together and the learned Advocates representing the parties had addressed the court on the said common question of law.
(2.) C.R. 2292 of 1976 was obtained by the tenant-defendant in a suit for ejectment who had applied to the court under on S. 17(2) of West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956. The court has decided the dispute raised by the tenant by holding that a sum Rs. 8,980/- was to be deposited by the tenant (petitioner). The petitioner had contented before the court that through he has invoked the provision of S. 17(2) of the Act raising a dispute, he was entitled to instalments under the provisions of sub-clause (b) of S. 17 (2A) of the Act. The court held that the aforesaid provision is not available to him. The prayer for instalment, accordingly, stood disallowed and the petitioner was directed to deposit the above sum within two months from date.
(3.) The other connected Rule is C.R. 3039 of 1976 which was obtained by the landlords in the same suit, who challenged the legality of the same order as aforesaid on the ground that the tenant had admitted some arrears of rent while making his application under S. 17(2) of the Act. but the said admitted rent was not deposited along with the application under S. 17(2) and, as such the condition imposed by S. 17(2) was not fulfilled so that the application of the tenant should have been thrown out in limine and the order passed by the court was patently illegal and should be set aside.;