Sarkar, J. - (1.) (Subba Rao and Mudholkar, JJ. with him):By an unregistered instrument of lease, dated February 3, 1953, the respondent let out a piece of vacant land in the town of Coimbatore to the appellants for the term of one year at a rent of Rs. 30 per month. The tenants held over after the expiry of the term reserved and the tenancy was continued. The lease provided that the tenants "shall not raise any building whatsoever in the vacant site" but they committed a breach of the covenant by putting up a building on the land.
(2.) On December 4, 1956, the lessor filed a suit for ejectment of the tenants and their sub-tenants. Pending the suit, the Madras City Tenants' Protection Act, 1921, was on February 19, 1958 made applicable to the town of Coimbatore and thereupon the tenants made an application in the suit under S. 9 of the Act for an order directing the lessor to sell the land to them. The trial Court, a learned Sub-Judge in first appeal and Anantanarayanan, J. in second appeal to the High Court of Madras held that the tenants were entitled to the order. A Division Bench of the High Court took a contrary view in a Letters Patent Appeal preferred by the lessor. The tenants have appealed to this Court against the judgment of the Division Bench.
(3.) The question naturally turns upon the provisions of the Act the relevant parts of which we will, therefore, set out at once. Section 2 (4). "'Tenant' means tenant of land liable to pay rent on it. Section 3. "Every tenant shall on ejectment be entitled to be paid as compensation the value of any building which may have been erected by him." Section 9. "Any tenant who is entitled to compensation under S. 3 and against whom a suit in ejectment has been instituted .... may ...... apply to the Court for an order that the landlord shall be directed to sell ....... the extent of land to be specified in the application." Section 12. "Nothing in any contract made by a tenant shall take away or limit his rights under this Act, provided that nothing herein contained shall affect any stipulations made by the tenant in writing registered as to the erection of buildings in so far as they relate to buildings erected after the date of the contract." It will be noticed that a tenant entitled to purchase under S. 9 must be a tenant entitled to compensation under S. 3. The real question, therefore, is whether the tenants in the present case were entitled to compensation under S. 3. We may observe that we shall not in the present case be concerned with the proviso to S. 12 as the lease was not by a registered document and hence reference in this judgment to that Section will be to that Section without the proviso. We should also state that by virtue of S. 10. S. 9. is applicable to suits pending in Coimbatore Courts when the Act was applied to that city.;