MANGTULAL Vs. RADHA SHYAM
LAWS(PAT)-1952-9-2
HIGH COURT OF PATNA
Decided on September 23,1952

MANGTULAL Appellant
VERSUS
RADHA SHYAM Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Narayan, J. - (1.) These appeals arise out of suits in ejectment which had been instituted on the 3rd October, 1945, in the Court of the Munsif of Dhanbad. The plaintiffs sought the ejectment of the defendants from rooms in a certain building belonging to the plaintiffs and occupied by the defendants on payment of rent. The case sought to be made out was that the tenancy had been terminated by a notice to quit but, that still, the defendants had continued in occupation of the rooms. Arrears of rent and damages for use and occupation were also claimed by the plaintiffs. The defendants pleaded that they were not occupying the house, or the rooms as tenants under the plaintiffs, that no valid notice to quit had been served upon them and that the provisions of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Ordinance, 1946 were a bar to the suits.
(2.) The courts below decided all questions of fact against the defendants, and as to the question whether the provisions of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Ordinance, 1946, were a bar to the suits they were of the opinion that as the Ordinance had no retrospective effect, these suits which had been instituted in the year 1945 were not hit by its provisions. The defendants consequently, came up in second appeal, and the two appeals which arose out of two of the suits were placed before a Division Bench consisting of my learned brothers. After having heard the Counsel for the parties my learned brothers were of the opinion that it was of great Constitutional importance to decide if an extension of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1947, by a competent legislature required the assent of the President in order to resolve any repugnancy between the provisions of the Act of 1947, and any existing law contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, the Indian Contract Act and the Transfer of Property Act, It was, therefore, suggested by my learned brothers that these two appeals be referred to a larger Bench for final decision, and the points formulated are as follows: " (1) Whether, in the circumstances stated above, the Bihar Buildings, (Lease, Rent and. Eviction) Control (Amendment) Act, 1951, required assent of the President under the provisions of Article 254 of the Constitution, of India, and (2) whether in the absence of such assent, the provisions of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act,' 1947, still operate, after the 14th of March 1952, in spite of the provisions being, repugnant to existing law contained in the Civil Procedure Code, the Indian Contract Act or the Transfer of Property Act."
(3.) The Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Ordinance, 1946, was repealed, by the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1947, and Section 11 of this Act lays down, 'inter alia', that notwithstanding, anything contained in any agreement or law to the contrary and subject to the provisions of: Section 12, where a tenant is in possession of any building," he shall not be liable to be evicted therefrom whether in execution of a decree or otherwise, except in certain circumstances specified in this section. Sub-section (2) of this section lays down that a landlord who seeks to evict his tenant under sub-section. (1) shall apply to the Controller for a direction in that behalf; and Sub-section (3) lays down that a landlord may apply to the Controller for an order directing the tenant to put the landlord in possession of a building if he requires it reasonably and in good faith for his own occupation or for the occupation of any person, for whose benefit the building is held by him. The other sub-sections of this section are not material for our present purpose.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.