Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2019 (10) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (10) TMI 1587 - SUPREME COURTEviction payment - non-payment of arrears of rent in respect of two shops - Section 7(2) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 - HELD THAT:- There are no error in the order passed by the High Court. One of the grounds of the eviction in terms of the Section 6(1)(b) of the Act is default in payment of rent for three months within the period of twelve months, or for three rental periods within the period of three years where the rent is not payable monthly. It is Section 7 of the Act which provides for an opportunity to the tenant to make the payment of arrears of rent, to avoid an order of eviction on account of its non-payment. Another three Judge Bench judgment in ARJUN KHIAMAL MAKHIJANI AND ORS. VERSUS JAMNADAS C. TULIANI AND ORS. [1989 (10) TMI 241 - SUPREME COURT] while examining provisions of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 held that Section 13(a) of the Rajasthan Act was to confer benefits on all tenants against whom suits for eviction on the ground of default of payment of rent were pending. Such judgment was not found to be attracted in view of mandatory provisions contained in Section 12(3)(a) of the Bombay Act. While examining as to when the provision of a statute is to be treated as directory or mandatory, this Court held in NASIRUDDIN AND ORS. VERSUS SITA RAM AGARWAL [2003 (1) TMI 693 - SUPREME COURT] that if an act is required to be performed by a private person within a specified time, the same would ordinarily be mandatory but when a public functionary is required to perform a public function within a time-frame, the same will be held to be directory unless the consequences thereof are specified. The deposit of rent along with an application for determination of dispute is a pre-condition to avoid eviction on the ground of non-payment of arrears of rent. In view thereof, tenant will not be able to take recourse to Section 5 of the Limitation Act as it is not an application alone which is required to be filed by the tenant but the tenant has to deposit admitted arrears of rent as well. There are no error in the order passed by the learned Single Judge - appeal dismissed.
|