Court rules City Civil Court had jurisdiction; tenant's rights annulled under West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997
In a significant ruling by the Calcutta High Court, the eviction of Srikanta Paul, the appellant in a long-standing tenancy dispute, has been upheld. The Division Bench, comprising Justices Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Sandip Kumar De, delivered the judgment on August 13, 2026, affirming the City Civil Court's jurisdiction and the annulment of tenancy rights under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997.
The appellant, Srikanta Paul, had challenged an eviction suit initiated by Purshottam Lal Sanganeria (HUF), represented by Karta Purshottam Lal Sanganeria. The primary contention revolved around the applicability of Section 2(g) and Section 12A of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997, in determining jurisdiction and tenancy rights.
Justice Bhattacharyya, delivering the judgment, clarified that the City Civil Court possessed the requisite subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate the eviction suit. Contrary to the appellant's assertion, the statutory jurisdiction conferred on the Small Causes Court under Schedule IV(c), read with Section 12A, was deemed inapplicable as the appellant was not a "tenant" within the meaning of the Act after the stipulated moratorium period of five years.
The court meticulously examined the applicability of Section 2(g), which pertains to tenancy rights inherited post-enactment of the 1997 Act. The bench held that the appellant's tenancy rights were effectively revoked five years after the demise of his father, aligning with the statutory provisions. The issuance of rent receipts during the moratorium period did not establish any independent tenancy rights, the court observed.
The appellant had also argued that the acceptance of rent post his father's demise amounted to the creation of a new tenancy. However, the court dismissed this contention, citing a lack of evidence to support any intention or consent to create a new tenancy by the respondents. The ruling emphasized that mere acceptance of rent does not constitute the formation of a new tenancy under the law.
This decision reaffirms the legal tenets governing tenancy disputes in West Bengal, specifically highlighting the constraints imposed by the 1997 Act. The ruling underscores the necessity for tenants to adhere to statutory timelines and the limitations on inherited tenancy rights post-enactment.
The appeal, FA 204 of 2024, was ultimately dismissed, with the court affirming the City Civil Court's judgment and decree dated June 29, 2024. The judgment not only provides clarity on jurisdictional matters but also delineates the boundaries of tenancy rights under the current legislative framework.
Bottom Line :
West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997, Section 2(g) - Tenant at sufferance vs. trespasser - Applicability of Section 12A and jurisdiction of courts in eviction suits under 1997 Act.
Statutory provision(s):
West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997, Section 2(g), Section 12A, Schedule IV, Presidency Small Causes Courts Act, 1882, City Civil Courts Act, 1953
Srikanta Paul v. Purshottam Lal Sanganeria (HUF), (Calcutta)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2963329
