RAI BRIJ RAJ KRISHNA Vs. S K SHAW
LAWS(SC)-1951-2-1
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: PATNA)
Decided on February 02,1951

RAI BRIJ RAJ KRISHNA Appellant
VERSUS
S.K.SHAW Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

COLONIAL BANK OF AUSTRALASIA V. WILLAN [REFERRED]



Cited Judgements :-

OM PARKASH MANGAL VS. LEKH RAJ AGGARWAL [LAWS(DLH)-1966-2-5] [REFERRED TO]
BINDRA WATCH CO VS. DELHI SIKH GURDWARA BOARD [LAWS(DLH)-1974-4-8] [REFERRED TO]
SHAH RASIKLAL CHUNILAL VS. SINDHI SHYAMLAL MULCHAND [LAWS(GJH)-1970-11-1] [REFERRED]
BALADIN VS. RAM PIAREY [LAWS(ALL)-1952-8-37] [REFERRED TO]
UPPER INDIA COUPAR PAPER MILLS CO LTD VS. J C MATHUR [LAWS(ALL)-1959-3-17] [REFERRED TO]
RAM SARUP VS. SHIKHAR CHAND [LAWS(ALL)-1960-9-12] [REFERRED TO]
PUSHPA DEVI VS. KANSHI RAM NAND KISHORE [LAWS(HPH)-1951-7-1] [REFERRED TO]
AMBAKA VS. AJMAT [LAWS(HPH)-1956-4-1] [REFERRED TO]
JAGTU VS. BADRI [LAWS(J&K)-1979-3-1] [REFERRED TO]
TRALOK CHAND VS. ARJUN SINGH [LAWS(HPH)-1977-6-5] [REFERRED TO]
K RAJA GOPALAREDDY VS. E KUMARASWAMY REDDY [LAWS(APH)-1963-11-26] [REFERRED TO]
ULIGAPPA VS. S MOHAN RAO MINOR [LAWS(APH)-1968-11-4] [REFERRED TO]
DONTIREDDY VENKATA REDDY VS. BHIMAVARAPU BHUSHIREDDY [LAWS(APH)-1970-3-2] [REFERRED TO]
CORPORATION OF CALCUTTA VS. KRISHNA MOHAN KUNDU [LAWS(CAL)-1953-12-10] [REFERRED TO]
J TGOPALAKRISHNAN VS. H SRAJA IYENGAR [LAWS(KAR)-1952-3-12] [REFERRED TO]
TNAGAPPA VS. T CBASAPPA [LAWS(KAR)-1954-1-4] [REFERRED TO]
TIPPAYYA KUPPAYYA VAIDYA VS. RAMA NARAYANA HEGDE [LAWS(KAR)-1960-10-9] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF WEST BENGAL VS. INDIAN IRON AND STEEL CO LTD [LAWS(CAL)-1962-4-19] [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNAMONI DASI VS. BASER MONDAL [LAWS(CAL)-1962-8-9] [REFERRED TO]
SURYA PROPERTIES PRIVATE LTD VS. BIMALENDU NATH SARKAR [LAWS(CAL)-1963-6-3] [REFERRED TO]
TEJMAN VS. D P ANAND [LAWS(CAL)-1964-4-17] [REFERRED TO]
RAMKRISHNA PRADHAN VS. STATE OF ORISSA [LAWS(ORI)-1951-11-4] [REFERRED TO]
RAMSINGH GANGARAM VS. STATE OF M P [LAWS(MPH)-1965-3-10] [REFERRED TO]
QUADER NOWAZ VS. COMMISSIONER OF WAKFS [LAWS(CAL)-1977-8-38] [REFERRED TO]
THYCATTUSERI CHURCH VS. SICILLYAMMA [LAWS(KER)-1962-9-22] [REFERRED TO]
LELITHA VS. AYISSUMMA [LAWS(KER)-1977-4-8] [REFERRED TO]
RAJAMANNAR CHETTIAR VS. VELAYUTHA CHETTIAR [LAWS(MAD)-1984-7-45] [REFERRED TO]
BHAIYA PUNJALAL BHAGWANDDIN VS. DAVE BHAGWATPRASAD PRABHUPRA SAD [LAWS(SC)-1962-5-6] [DISTINGUISHED]
V DHANAPAL CHETTIAR VS. YESODAI AMMAL [LAWS(SC)-1979-8-12] [DISTINGUISHED]
LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA VS. INDIA AUTOMOBILES AND CO [LAWS(SC)-1990-8-34] [REFERRED TO]
RAVAL AND CO VS. K G RAMACHANDRAN [LAWS(SC)-1973-12-16] [REFERRED TO]
CARONA SHOE COMPANY LIMITED VS. K C BHASKARAN NAIR [LAWS(SC)-1989-3-41] [DISTINGUISHED]
SALLA VENKAMMA VS. SAINAYGARI GANGAJI [LAWS(APH)-1957-3-3] [REFERRED TO]
MIC ELECTRONICS LIMITED VS. INTERNATIONAL TECHNO MEDIA PVT LTD [LAWS(APH)-2011-11-42] [REFERRED TO]
GOMATHI AMMAL VS. P CHINNAKANNU PILLAI [LAWS(KER)-1953-10-24] [REFERRED TO]
BENUDHAR DALAI VS. STATE OF ORISSA [LAWS(ORI)-1958-4-13] [REFERRED TO]
SUDARSHAN GHOSH VS. JANAKINATH PANDIT [LAWS(CAL)-1976-3-12] [REFERRED TO]
KRUSHNA CHANDRA VS. HEMAMANI BISWAL [LAWS(ORI)-1970-8-1] [REFERRED TO]
MALABAR INDUSTRIAL CO VS. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL TRIVANDRUM [LAWS(KER)-1959-3-6] [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNA KAMALINI DEBEYA VS. JUNIOR LAND REFORMS OFFICER KHANDAGHOSH [LAWS(CAL)-1981-3-37] [REFERRED TO]
RAMNARAIN BHUJBALSINGH VS. PURUSHOTTAM POORNASHANKER [LAWS(MPH)-1981-2-25] [REFERRED TO]
ABHIMANYU JEE VS. GAYAPRASAD [LAWS(ORI)-1982-6-3] [REFERRED TO]
JOY VS. STEPHEN JACOB [LAWS(KER)-1983-11-11] [REFERRED TO]
SINGAN CHETTY ATEENDROOLOO CHETTYS CHARITIES VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU MADRAS [LAWS(MAD)-1990-9-64] [REFERRED TO]
CHERUKUTTY VS. SUBRAMA SASTRIGAL [LAWS(KER)-1987-9-31] [REFERRED TO]
NAMDEO KHUSHAL DIGHE VS. KESHARBAI DAMODHARDAS CHANDAK [LAWS(BOM)-1973-6-1] [REFERRED TO]
P K MOHAMMED RASHEED VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-1993-10-33] [REFERRED TO]
ALL INDIA HANDLOOM FABRICS MARKETING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY VS. MATHEW [LAWS(KER)-2005-1-18] [REFERRED TO]
LAL SINGH VS. MEHR SINGH [LAWS(P&H)-1951-7-18] [REFERRED TO]
RAJA RAM VS. SHAM LAL [LAWS(P&H)-1953-9-3] [REFERRED TO]
DES RAJ VS. RAM SINGH [LAWS(P&H)-1954-7-9] [REFERRED TO]
FIRM ADARSH INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION VS. MARKET COMMITTEEKARNAL [LAWS(P&H)-1962-1-9] [REFERRED TO]
RAMCHANDRA RAM VS. RAM RATAN PRASAD [LAWS(PAT)-1951-7-6] [REFERRED TO]
GURDIAL KAUR VS. MUKAND SINGH [LAWS(P&H)-1966-5-8] [REFERRED TO]
MANGTULAL VS. RADHA SHYAM [LAWS(PAT)-1952-9-2] [REFERRED TO]
S M ZAKI VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-1953-1-1] [REFERRED TO]
SAWARAJ PAL VS. JANAK RAJ [LAWS(P&H)-1968-5-7] [REFERRED TO]
SATYANARAIN JHUNJHUNWALLA VS. MUSTAFA KAMAL MOHIUDDIN AKHTAR [LAWS(PAT)-1953-8-9] [REFERRED TO]
KEDARNATH GUPTA VS. NAGINDRA NARAYAN SINHA [LAWS(PAT)-1953-8-5] [REFERRED TO]
RAMNARAIN LAL VS. RADHARAMAN DAS [LAWS(PAT)-1953-8-15] [REFERRED TO]
RAMNATH SAHANI VS. SM SUKUMARI SINHA [LAWS(PAT)-1953-8-6] [REFERRED TO]
WAZIRA VS. SHAMULAL [LAWS(RAJ)-1960-6-7] [REFERRED TO]
BHAGWAN DAS VS. SM DULARI JAISWAL [LAWS(PAT)-1954-8-2] [REFERRED TO]
BRIJ BHUKAN KALWAR VS. S [LAWS(PAT)-1954-8-1] [REFERRED TO]
SEWJI KUTCHI VS. BAJRANG AGARWALA [LAWS(PAT)-1955-9-8] [REFERRED TO]
CHIRONJILAL PODDAR VS. MADHUSUDAN THAKUR [LAWS(PAT)-1956-11-4] [REFERRED TO]
SAILENDRA NARAYAN BHANJ DEO VS. JAGAT KISHORE PRASAD NARAYAN SINGH [LAWS(PAT)-1956-12-7] [REFERRED TO]
HIRENDRA NATH BOSE VS. SHYAMSUNDAR MISSER [LAWS(PAT)-1957-11-7] [REFERRED TO]
GANESH LAL VS. NARAIN LAL [LAWS(PAT)-1958-3-14] [REFERRED TO]
CHOETH RAM VS. DEEP CHAND JAIN [LAWS(P&H)-1976-11-13] [REFERRED TO]
PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION VS. RAM BACHAN LAL [LAWS(PAT)-1960-11-6] [REFERRED TO]
KISHUN SAH VS. HARINANDAN PRASAD SAH [LAWS(PAT)-1962-10-11] [REFERRED TO]
DAYAWANTI VS. COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH-TAX [LAWS(P&H)-1980-7-9] [REFERRED TO]
NIRANJAN PAL VS. CHAITANYALAL GHOSH [LAWS(PAT)-1964-4-5] [REFERRED TO]
JAGBANDHAN NATH TEWARY VS. THUIYA MAHLI [LAWS(PAT)-1973-3-12] [REFERRED TO]
RAM NANDAN SHARMA VS. MAYA DEVI [LAWS(PAT)-1974-9-14] [REFERRED TO]
KALOOT SAO VS. T NAME NOT KNOWN [LAWS(PAT)-1976-8-14] [REFERRED TO]
SK HALALUDDIN VS. NABI HASAN [LAWS(PAT)-1982-5-7] [REFERRED TO]
PARWATI DEVI VS. SACHCHIDANAND SAN [LAWS(PAT)-1982-11-20] [REFERRED TO]
MADALSA DEVI VS. MRIDULA CHANDRA [LAWS(PAT)-1992-9-48] [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD VS. KULWANTI KAUR [LAWS(ALL)-2012-8-44] [REFERRED TO]
NANDU RAM VS. JAGANNATH PARSHOTAM DAS [LAWS(HPH)-1952-11-3] [REFERRED TO]
GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS. FIROZE M MOGAL [LAWS(GJH)-2013-12-109] [REFERRED TO]
DHARMARTH TRUST VS. GH MOHD DRABU [LAWS(J&K)-1978-9-11] [REFERRED TO]
MOHAN LAL VS. NAHAR SINGH [LAWS(P&H)-1969-4-21] [REFERRED TO]
BHAIYA RAM HARGO LAL VS. MAHAVIR PRASAD MURARI LAL MAHAJAN [LAWS(P&H)-1968-10-25] [REFERRED TO]
MOOL RAJ JAIN VS. M/S JAYNA ENGINEERING WORKS [LAWS(P&H)-1976-11-25] [REFERRED TO]
THE DELHI MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE VS. BHAGWAN DASS [LAWS(P&H)-1960-8-36] [REFERRED TO]
MRS. E. WILLIAMS AND ANOTHER VS. VALLABHDASS [LAWS(APH)-1961-10-25] [REFERRED TO]
PABBOJAN TEA CO. LTD. AND ORS. VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND ORS. [LAWS(GAU)-1962-12-4] [REFERRED TO]
PADMANABHA MENON KRISHNA MENON VS. INCOME TAX COMMISSIONER AND ORS. [LAWS(KER)-1952-8-22] [REFERRED TO]
VARINDER KUMAR AND ORS. VS. JAGDISH SINGLA AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2002-8-105] [REFERRED TO]
ONKAR NATH VS. CHHAJJU RAM [LAWS(ALL)-1962-5-38] [REFERRED TO]
JNANENDRA NARAYAN SING AND ORS. VS. MOMENA KHATUN AND ANR. [LAWS(CAL)-1954-2-23] [REFERRED TO]
NATHU AND ANOTHER VS. KAMLABAI AND ANOTHER [LAWS(BOM)-1974-3-42] [REFERRED TO]
PRABHAKAR RAMCHANDRA BHAVE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS [LAWS(BOM)-1977-2-15] [REFERRED TO]
HARRISONS MALAYALAM LIMITED VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2018-4-31] [REFERRED TO]
DONTIREDDY VENKATA REDDY VS. BHIMAVARAPU BHUSHIREDDY AND OTHERS [LAWS(APH)-1967-4-35] [REFERRED TO]
K. RAJA GOPALAREDDY AND OTHERS VS. E. KUMARASWAMY REDDY AND OTHERS [LAWS(APH)-1962-8-30] [REFERRED TO]
S.S. RANJALKAR VS. MANGALAGIRI KHAJAMIAH [LAWS(APH)-1959-11-46] [REFERRED TO]
SATYASIVA SUNDAR NAYAK VS. SECRETARY, BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, ORISSA AND OTHERS [LAWS(ORI)-2019-5-14] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)This is an appeal from a judgment and decree of the H. C. of Judicature at Patna reversing the appellate decree of a Subordinate Judge in suit instituted by the resps. The facts of the case are briefly these. The resps. have been in occupation as a monthly tenant of several blocks of premises belonging to the applts. at a monthly rental of Rs. 112. The rent for the months of March, April and May, 1947 having fallen into arrears, they remitted it along with the rent for June, on 28-6-1947, by means of two cheques. As the applts did not accept the cheques, on 4-8-1947, the resps. remitted the amount subsequently by postal money order. On 12-8-1947, the applts. maintaining that there was non-payment of rent and hence the resps. were liable to be evicted, under S. 11 (1) (a), Bihar Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1947 (III [3] of 1947), applied to the House Controller for the eviction of the resps. from the premises. Section 11 (1) (a) of the Act runs as follows:
"Notwithstanding anything contained in any agreement or law to the contrary and Subject to the provisions of S. 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-

(a) in the case of a month to month tenant, for non-payment of rent or breach of the conditions of the tenancy, or for subletting the building or any portion thereof without the consent of the landlord, or if he is an employee of the landlord occupying the building as an employee, on his ceasing to be in such employment;"

(2.)On 30-8-1947, the resps. whose money order had in the meantime been returned by the applts. deposited the rent up to the month of June in the Office of the House Controller. Notwithstanding this deposit, the House Controller passed an order on 10th November, directing the eviction of the resps. by 10-5-1948, and holding that they had trade themselves liable to eviction by reason of non-payment of rent. The order of the House Controller was upheld by the Comr. on appeal on 27-4-1948, and there upon the resps. filed the present suit in the Patna Munsif's Ct. for a declaration that the order of the Controller dated 10-11-1947 was illegal, ultra vires and without jurisdiction. The suit was dismissed by the Munsif and his decree was upheld on appeal, but the H. C. decreed the suit holding that the order of the Rent Controller was without jurisdiction. The applts. were thereafter granted leave to appeal by the H. C. and they have accordingly preferred this appeal.
(3.)The H. 0. has delivered a somewhat elaborate judgment in the case, but it seems to us that the point arising in this appeal is a simple one. The main ground on which the resps. have attacked the order of eviction passed by the House Controller is that in fact there was no non-payment of rent, and since no eviction can be ordered under the Bihar Act unless non-payment is established, the House Controller had no jurisdiction to order eviction. On the other hand, one of the contentions put forward on behalf of the applts is that there was non-payment of rent within the meaning of that expression as used in the Act, since the rent was not paid as and when it fell due. It was pointed out that the rent for the month of March became due in April and the rent for April became due in May, but no step was taken by the resps. to pay the arrears until 28-6-1947. It appears that at the inception of the tenancy, the resps. had paid one month's rent in advance, and it had been agreed between them and the applts that the advance rent would be adjusted whenever there was default in payment of rent for full one month. It was however pointed out that the advance payment could be adjusted only for one month's rent, but, in the present case, the rent for three months had become due, and since in a monthly tenancy the rent is payable from month to month, the rent for each month becoming due in the subsequent month, non-payment of that rent at the proper time was sufficient to attract the provisions of S. 11 (1) (a) of the Act. The applts. also raised a second contention, namely, that having regard to the scheme of the Act, the House Controller was fully competent to decide whether the condition precedent to eviction had been satisfied, and once that decision had been arrived at, it could not be questioned in a civil Court. This contention was accepted by the first two Ct, and the first appellate Ct. dealing with it observed as follows :
"But the Buildings Control Act has authorised the Controller to decide whether or not there is non-payment of rent and it is only when he is satisfied that there has been non- payment of rent then he assumes jurisdiction. If the question of jurisdiction depends upon the decision of some fact or point of law and if the Ct. is called upon to decide such question then such decision cannot be collaterally impeached (vide Girwar Narayan v. Kamla Prasad, 12 Pat. 117: (A.I.R. (20) 1933 Pat. 104). In my opinion when the Controller assumed the jurisdiction on being satisfied that there was non-payment of rent and proceeded to pass an order of eviction I think the civil Ct, can have no jurisdiction to challenge the validity of such order."

;


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