1987 (9) TMI 412 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Applicability of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972.
2. Computation of the 10-year exemption period.
3. Rights of parties based on the date of filing the suit.
4. Applicability of Sections 39 and 40 of the Act.
5. Protection under Section 20 of the Act.

Summary:

1. Applicability of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972:
The main issue before the High Court was whether the provisions of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 ("Act") were applicable to the proceedings. The High Court concluded that the Act would not apply for 10 years from the date of assessment, i.e., October 1, 1976, and thus decreed the suit for eviction.

2. Computation of the 10-year exemption period:
The High Court determined that the 10-year period of exemption should be computed from the date of the first assessment, which was October 1, 1976. This interpretation was supported by Section 2 sub-clause 2 Explanation 1 of the Act and upheld by the Supreme Court, referencing the decision in Om Prakash Gupta v. Dig Vijendrapal Gupta.

3. Rights of parties based on the date of filing the suit:
The respondent's counsel argued that the rights of the parties should be determined based on the date the suit was filed. The Supreme Court agreed, stating that the rights must be determined based on the law applicable on the date of the suit and not subsequently, referencing the decision in Firms Amar Nath Basheshar Dass v. Tek Chand.

4. Applicability of Sections 39 and 40 of the Act:
The appellant contended that Sections 39 and 40 of the Act should apply, granting protection even if 10 years had elapsed during the pendency of the proceedings. However, the Supreme Court rejected this argument, stating that Sections 39 and 40 apply only to suits pending on the date of the commencement of the Act, i.e., July 15, 1972, and not to suits filed thereafter.

5. Protection under Section 20 of the Act:
The Supreme Court emphasized that Section 20 of the Act restricts the institution of eviction suits except on specified grounds. Since the suit was filed within the 10-year exemption period, the restrictions under Section 20 were not applicable. The Court concluded that the appellant could not be given the advantage of the Act's provisions.

Conclusion:
The appeal was dismissed, and the decree for eviction was maintained. However, the appellant was granted time until March 31, 1988, to vacate the premises, provided an undertaking was filed within four weeks. Each party was directed to bear its own costs.