Final Relief Should Not Be Granted on Interlocutory Application – Calcutta High Court on Enhanced Fair Rent Order

High Court’s Judgment Emphasizes Importance of Procedural Fairness in Rent Disputes
The High Court at Calcutta has set aside an order by the learned Tribunal directing the payment of enhanced fair rent, highlighting the procedural impropriety of granting final relief on an interlocutory application. The judgment, delivered by a bench comprising Justices Tapabrata Chakraborty and Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, underscores the necessity for due process in rent enhancement cases and mandates a proper reassessment by the Tribunal.
The dispute stems from a long-standing tenancy conflict over office space in Kolkata. The premises, originally leased in 1965, saw multiple renewals and sublets, with the most recent lease expiring in December 2016. Following the expiry, the landlords sought possession, and the tenants pursued fair rent enhancement under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997.
In 2004, the tenants filed for rent enhancement under Section 17(4A) of the Act, which was later amended to include Section 17(6). The Rent Controller eventually fixed the fair rent in 2022, prompting further litigation. The learned Tribunal, in an interlocutory order dated November 30, 2023, directed the petitioners (sub-tenants) to pay substantial arrears and enhanced rent, which led to the present writ petition challenging the justifiability of the Tribunal’s order.
The High Court scrutinized the Tribunal’s decision to grant what amounted to final relief on an interlocutory application. Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee remarked, “Granting final relief on an interlocutory application is improper. The core issue of fair rent assessment should be resolved through proper procedural conduct, ensuring fairness to all parties involved.”
The court delved into the implications of the lease expiry on the tenants’ rights. With the original lease expiring in 2016 and subsequent legal actions for possession by the landlords, the court questioned the tenants’ standing to claim rent post-expiry. “Whether the tenants can claim rent after 2016 is a crucial issue awaiting resolution,” noted Justice Chatterjee.
The judgment highlighted the need for a thorough examination of whether the rent enhancement should follow Section 17(4A) or Section 17(6) of the 1997 Act. The court criticized the Tribunal’s reliance on precedents without adequately aligning the factual circumstances of the current case.
Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee emphasized, “Final relief should not be granted on an interlocutory application. Courts must ensure that the interim orders serve to prevent injustice, not preempt the final decision.”
The High Court’s decision reinforces the importance of procedural fairness in adjudicating rent disputes. By setting aside the Tribunal’s order and directing a reassessment, the judgment ensures that due process is followed, balancing the interests of both landlords and tenants. This ruling is expected to impact future cases, underlining the judiciary’s commitment to upholding fair legal practices.
 

Date of Decision: June 27, 2024

Rajib Ghoshal & Ors. Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.