Sl.13 21.08.2026 Court No.6 BP C.O. 2768 of 2026 Sri Nikhil Baran Majumdar -versus- Smt. Sankari Saha Mr. Pinaki Dhole Mr. Rabindra Kr. Pathak Ms. Srijita Nae ..for the petitioner This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the defendant/appellant in O.C. Appeal No. 13 of 2019 and is directed against an order being no.50 dated 18th July, 2026 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track, 3rd Court at Malda. By the order impugned the application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure stood rejected. The learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that during the pendency of the suit the petitioner complied with the provisions of Section 7(1) and Section 7(2) of the 1997 Act. However, after the decree was passed and the appeal was preferred the petitioner did not deposit any amount as contemplated under Section 7(1) and Section 7(2) of the 1997 Act. In the case on hand an eviction decree has already been passed. With the passing of the eviction decree the landlord-tenant relationship between the parties gets severed and the petitioner, who was the defendant, in the 2 suit is not under any obligation to comply with the mandate of Section 7 of the 1997 Act during the pendency of the Title Appeal. Thus, the learned trial judge was right in not allowing the petitioner to deposit the amount equivalent to rent on and from the date of filing of the appeal. The impugned order does not suffer from infirmity. This Court further finds that the hearing of the stay application was fixed on 31st July, 2026. With the above observations, C.O. 2768 of 2026 stands disposed of. There shall be, however, no order as to costs. Urgent certified photocopy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties expeditiously on compliance of usual legal formalities. (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)