- (1.) These matters come before us for clarification of the order passed by us sitting with Bhagwati, CJ, on April, 23. 1986. A bench consisting of Hon'ble A.P. Sen, A. Varadarajan and V. Balakrishna Eradi, JJ passed the following order on November 9, 1983 : "After hearing the counsel for both the parties at some length, it seems to us that the correctness of the decision in Firms Amar Nath Bashesh Das v. Tek Chand, 1972 (3) SCR 922 , is open to doubt. It appears that the interpretation placed by the Court as to the scope and effect of the exemption in Section 3 of the East I Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1943, which is in pari-materia with Section 3 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949. (as extended to the Union Territory of Chandigarh) with which we are concerned in this appeal, requires re-consideration. We do feel that the second part of the impugned notification issued by the Chief Commissioner. Chandigarh dated September 24, 1974, under Section 3 of the Act. in effect, permits the Civil Courts to pass decrees in suits for ejectment of tenants instituted by the landlords even after the expiry of the period of exemption, contrary to the statutory bar contained in Section 13 of the Act and therefore it could not be upheld. Let the papers he laid before Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India for placing the matter before a larger bench."
(2.) The effect of this order is to refer the question involved in the appeal to a bench of Five Judges. It was after this a mention was made before us, sitting with Bhagwati, CT, on April 23, 1986, when we passed the following order : "Reference to a three-Judge bench made by this Court on 9.11.1983 is in respect of the suit for ejectment of tenants instituted by the landlord after the expiry of the period of exemption and does not cover cases where suits were instituted by the landlord prior to the expiry of the period of exemption but decree was passed subsequent to the period of exemption. Hence all cases where suits for ejectment of tenants were instituted by the landlord after the expiry of the period of exemption shall be the subject matter of the reference to the larger bench. But the appeals and suits for ejectment of tenants instituted by the landlord prior to the expiry period of exemption shall not form part of the reference but these will be placed on board before us on 30.4. 1986."
(3.) In this order we made it clear that the reference to a larger bench (mistakenly shown as three-Judges) was only in respect of suits for 10 ejectment of tenants instituted by the landlord after the expiry of the period of exemption and does not cover cases where suits were instituted by the landlord prior to the expiry of the period of exemption but wherein decree was passed subsequent to the period of exemption.;