DEBASISH PAUL & ANR. versus AMAL BORAL

DEBASISH PAUL & ANR. versus AMAL BORAL

While the Limitation Act is generally applicable to proceedings under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act by virtue of Section 40, a specific shorter or restrictive time provision in the Tenancy Act (Section 7 and its proviso) cannot be expanded by resort to Section 5 of the Limitation Act; deposit of arrears as...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Debasish Paul & Anr.; Respondent: Amal Boral
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
18 October 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (civil Appeal No. 6565 of 2023) / Appeal to the Supreme Court From the High Court at Calcutta Judgment Dated 21.08.2019 in C.o. No.3859 of 2018
Outcome
Appeal allowed; impugned High Court order dated 21.08.2019 set aside; Trial Court order dated 11.09.2018 upheld
Legal Topics
Section 5 Limitation Act, 1963, Section 7(1) and 7(2) West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997, Section 40 West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, Condonation of Delay, Deposit of Arrears of Rent, Protection Against Eviction
Limitation Law Tenancy Law Eviction Proceedings Section 5 Limitation Act, 1963 Section 7(1) and 7(2) West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 Section 40 West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 Condonation of Delay Deposit of Arrears of Rent +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Debasish Paul & Anr.

Appellant

Amal Boral

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (civil Appeal No. 6565 of 2023) / Appeal to the Supreme Court From the High Court at Calcutta Judgment Dated 21.08.2019 in C.o. No.3859 of 2018

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 could be invoked to condone delay in filing/complying with an application under Sections 7(1) and 7(2) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997
  2. 2 Whether the High Court was justified in directing the trial court to dispose of an application under Section 5 when the trial court had rejected the Section 7 application for delay
  3. 3 Whether failure to deposit arrears and plea of incorrect legal advice can entitle a tenant to relief under Section 5

Ratio Decidendi

While the Limitation Act is generally applicable to proceedings under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act by virtue of Section 40, a specific shorter or restrictive time provision in the Tenancy Act (Section 7 and its proviso) cannot be expanded by resort to Section 5 of the Limitation Act; deposit of arrears as required by Section 7 is a mandatory precondition and the tenant, having neither deposited arrears nor sought the limited one-time extension within the proviso, cannot succeed merely by alleging incorrect legal advice; accordingly the High Court's direction to permit filing under Section 5 was unsustainable and the trial court's rejection of the Section 7 application for delay...

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; impugned High Court order dated 21.08.2019 set aside; Trial Court order dated 11.09.2018 upheld

Orders

  • Impugned judgment and order of the High Court dated 21.08.2019 is set aside
  • Order of the Trial Court dated 11.09.2018 rejecting the application under Sections 7(1) and 7(2) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 is sustained