WRITTEN NOTES OF ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF THE TENANT / PETITIONER

 

BEFORE THE LEARNED RENT CONTROLLER, CALCUTTA
Alipore Judges’ Court, Alipore, Kolkata – 700027

 

Application No. 27/21/2023

 

In the matter of:

An Application under Section 21 of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997;

 

-And-

 

In the matter of:

Shri Inder Chand Agarwala,
Son of Late Sova Chand Agarwala,
of premises no. 1, Tarpan Ghat Road,
P.O. & P.S. – Behala, Kolkata – 700053,
District – South 24 Parganas.

... Tenant / Petitioner

-          Versus –

 

1.   Sarbati Devi Agarwala Estate,
of premises no. 1, Tarpan Ghat Road, P.O. & P.S. – Behala, Kolkata – 700053, District – South 24 Parganas.

 

2.   Misri Devi Agarwala Estate,
of premises no. 7, Rajani Sen Road,
Kolkata – 700026.

... Landlords / Respondents

 

WRITTEN NOTES OF ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF THE TENANT / PETITIONER

 

1. Submission of Facts;

 

1.1        The present application has been filed by the Petitioner under Section 21 of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997, seeking permission to deposit monthly rent in the office of the Learned Rent Controller in respect of the tenanted premises situated at 1, Tarpan Ghat Road, Kolkata – 700053, more fully described in the petition.

 

1.2        The Petitioner has been a lawful monthly tenant under the Respondents in respect of Shed No. IX, measuring approximately 9,000 sq. ft., since 1976, and has been continuously using the same for lawful commercial and industrial activities under the trade name M/s. Neha Enterprises.

 

 

1.3        The rent was originally Rs. 400/- per month, gradually increased to Rs. 4,040/- per month at present. Rent has always been paid regularly and without any default. The Respondents have accepted rent and issued rent receipts up to February 2023.

 

1.4        The Petitioner further tendered rent for March, April, and May 2023 through direct bank transfer, which was duly credited to the landlords’ account, as reflected in the Petitioner’s bank statement, but no receipts were issued thereafter.

 

1.5        From June 2023 onwards, the Respondents refused to accept rent without assigning any reason. The Petitioner tendered the rent for June and July 2023 through Money Orders, which were duly refused and returned by the Respondents.

 

1.6        In such circumstances, having no other alternative, the Petitioner has approached this Hon’ble Court under Section 21 of the said Act for permission to deposit rent to the credit of the landlords.

 

2. Statutory Provision;

 

2.1 Section 21 of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 provides as follows:

 

“When the landlord does not accept any rent tendered by the tenant within the time referred to in Section 20, the tenant may deposit such rent with the Controller in the prescribed manner.”

 

2.2 The said provision ensures that a tenant is not declared a defaulter merely because the landlord has refused to accept rent without cause. The object of the section is to provide a lawful avenue to the tenant to safeguard his tenancy rights and to prevent wrongful eviction on the ground of alleged default.

 

3. Legal Position & Judicial Precedents;

 

3.1 The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court has consistently held that refusal of rent by the landlord constitutes sufficient ground for deposit under Section 21.

 

I.             Biswanath Das v. Gouri Rani Das, (2004) 1 CHN 27 – It was held that once the tenant establishes that rent was tendered and refused, the deposit before the Controller is valid and saves the tenancy from default.

 

II.           Ratanlal Jain v. Harak Chand Jain, (1998) 2 CLJ 183 – The Court observed that Section 21 protects a tenant’s bona fide intention to pay rent and prevents exploitation by landlords who deliberately refuse rent to create a ground of default.

 

III.         Anup Kumar Mukherjee v. Smt. Sefali Roy, (2006) 2 WBLR (Cal) 403 – It was reiterated that a tenant who regularly tenders rent and subsequently deposits the same under Section 21 cannot be termed a defaulter within the meaning of the Act.

 

IV.         Madan Mohan Ghosh v. Smt. Juthika Basu, 2004 (2) CHN 87 – It was held that where the landlord refuses rent without justification, deposit before the Rent Controller under Section 21 is a valid discharge of the tenant’s obligation.

 

V.           Bishwanath Shaw v. Smt. Gouri Dutta, AIR 2001 Cal 233 – The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court reiterated that bona fide tender and subsequent deposit under the statute protect the tenant from default.

 

VI.         Smt. Anjana Saha v. Haripada Roy, 2008 (3) CHN 512 – The Court emphasized that rent deposit under Section 21 ensures continuation of tenancy and prevents forfeiture of the tenant’s rights.

 

4. Evidence on Record;

 

4.1 The Petitioner has produced the following documentary evidences to substantiate bona fide payment and refusal by the landlords;

 

(a)  Annexure “A” – Site plan of the tenanted Shed No. IX.

(b)  Annexure “B” – Photocopies of rent receipts for different periods.

(c)  Annexure “C” – Photocopies of bank statement showing payment of rent for March, April & May 2023.

(d)  Annexure “D” – Money Order receipts and Track Reports showing refusal of rent for June & July 2023.

 

4.2 The said documents clearly establish that the Petitioner has been regular in tendering rent and the failure to pay was solely due to the landlords’ refusal, not due to any negligence on the part of the tenant.

 

 

 

 

 

5. Application of Law to Facts;

 

5.1        The conduct of the Petitioner clearly fulfills the statutory requirement for invoking Section 21. The Petitioner tendered rent within the prescribed time each month, produced evidence of rent payment and refusal, and approached this Hon’ble Court without delay to deposit rent lawfully.

 

5.2        Therefore, the Petitioner cannot be branded as a defaulter in any sense, as the refusal of rent by the landlords disentitles them from alleging default.

 

5.3        The refusal of rent and non-issuance of rent receipts are deliberate and mala fide acts intended to harass the Petitioner and to create a false ground for eviction.

 

6. Prayer;

 

In light of the above facts, law, and precedents, it is most humbly submitted that:

 

a)    The Petition under Section 21 of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 deserves to be allowed;

 

b)   The Petitioner may kindly be permitted to deposit monthly rent of Rs. 4,040/- for August 2023 and for subsequent months in the office of the Learned Rent Controller to the credit of the Respondent-Landlords; and

 

c)    Such further order or orders may kindly be passed as your Honour may deem fit and proper for the ends of justice.

 

==========================XXX===========================