SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS EVICTION DECREE UNDER ORDER XII RULE 6 CPC: REITERATES NON-CONSIDERATION OF NEW PLEAS NOT RAISED BEFORE LOWER COURTS

A Division Bench of Supreme Court comprising of Justice J.B.Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan passed a Judgment dated 07.04.2025 in the case of Rajiv Ghosh vs Satya Naryan Jaiswal SLP (Civil) No. 9975 of 2025 wherein the Supreme Courtupheld the Judgment of High Court on Order XII Rule 6 and also held that is a plea is not raised before High Court and Trial Court, it cannot directly be considered by Supreme Court.

The Present Petition arose from the Judgment and Order passed by Calcutta High Court which dismissed the appeal filled by the Petitioner affirming the eviction decree passed by City Civil Court, Calcutta.

Facts of the Case:

That the Plaintiff is the lawful owner of the suit premises and the Defendant is the lawful tenant. The father of the Defendant had taken the property on rent at monthly rent of Rs. 1700/- . He passed away on 13.07.2016. The Plaintiff sent a notice dated 20^th July 2018 to Defendant that he being the son of the Original Tenant can take benefit of his statutory right up to 5 years from the date of death of his fatheri.e., 13.07.2016. When he did not receive a satisfactory reply, he filed title suit for recovery of possession and mesne profits.

Admissions by Defendant:

The Defendant in his Written statement admitted that the Plaintiff is the owner of the scheduled property and rent was paid till May 2021 to the Plaintiff. He also admitted that Defendant is his heir and legal representative. Based on the above admissions the Plaintiff preferred an Application under Order XII Rule 6 Code of Civil Procedure and prayed for a decree upon admission.

Judgment by Trial Court and High Court:

The Trial Court decided the Plaintiff’s application and decreed the suit having regard to specific admissions made by the Defendant. The Defendant filed this decree before the High Court. The High Court dismissed the Appeal on the ground that the Defendant is entitled to sustain tenancy for 5 years from the demise of the original tenantas per Section 2 (g) of  West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act 1997.This Period was over on May 2021 and so rightfully the Plaintiff stopped accepting the rent after the expiry of five years from the death of the original landlord.

Interpretation of Order XII Rule 6:

Order XII Rule 6 enables a Court to pronounce judgment on admission “either in pleading or otherwise”[1].

The High Court came to interpret the use of the phrase “otherwise” in the aforementioned meaning. In light of the phrase, the Court construed it to allow the Court to make a decision based on the parties’ statements not only in the pleadings but also outside of them, that is, in any document or even in a statement that was recorded in the Court.

 

Analysis of the Hon’ble Supreme Court

The Supreme Court appreciated the arguments of the Counsel that West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act 1997 is not applicable to the petitioner of the SLP and so the Petitioner Tenant has no right to continue in the said premises as the legal heir of the original Tenant.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court noticed that this plea was not raised before High Court or Trial Court and so dismissed the above Special Leave Petition.

Conclusion:

In Rajiv Ghosh vs. Satya Narayan Jaiswal, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, upheld the eviction decree passed by the Trial Court and affirmed by the Calcutta High Court. The Court emphasized the binding nature of admissions under Order XII Rule 6 CPC and clarified that a plea not raised before the Trial Court or High Court cannot be entertained for the first time before the Supreme Court. The judgment further reinforced that the benefit of statutory tenancy under Section 2(g) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997, ceases five years after the death of the original tenant. Consequently, the Supreme Court declined to interfere with the findings of the lower Courts and dismissed the Special Leave Petition.

 

TRISHA SAXENA
SENIOR LEGAL ASSOCIATE

THE INDIAN LAWYER & ALLIED SERVICES

Please log on to our YouTube channel, The Indian Lawyer Legal Tips, to learn about various aspects of the law. Our latest video, titled “Franchise Business” ‘, can be viewed at the link below:

https://youtu.be/yYY9FXEknwM?si=6I8SdrIkdIt7NQaM

[1]Any party may, at any stage of a suit. where admissions of facts have been made, either on pleadings or otherwise, apply to the Court for such judgment or order as upon such admissions he may be entitled to, without waiting for the determination of any other question between the parties and the Court may upon such application make such order or give such judgment, as the Court may think just.”