9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are the application of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction Control) Act, 1960 to a building constructed in 1958, the question of waiver by the appellant, and the jurisdiction of the Civil Court over the matter. Application of the Act: The appellant leased a building to the respondent in 1958, and after the lease expired in 1961, sought eviction under the Act. The Rent Controller dismissed the application, and subsequent appeals were also unsuccessful. The appellant then filed a suit in the Civil Court for eviction, claiming that the Act did not apply to the building as it was constructed after August 26, 1957. The trial Court and the First Appellate Court found that the Act did not apply to buildings constructed after August 1957, giving jurisdiction to the Civil Court in such cases. Question of Waiver: The High Court held that the appellant had waived the right to evict the respondent, citing a previous case where waiver was allowed under specific circumstances. However, the Supreme Court differentiated the present case from the previous case, emphasizing that waiver requires a voluntary and intentional relinquishment of a right, which was not evident in this situation. The Court highlighted that waiver cannot be applied where there is a mistake of fact, as in this case where the appellant mistakenly believed the building was outside the Act's scope. Jurisdiction of Civil Court: The Supreme Court ruled that the Rent Controller had no jurisdiction over the building due to its construction date, making the decree in the Rent Controller's suit not applicable as res judicata. The Court clarified that neither estoppel nor res judicata can confer jurisdiction under Rent Control Acts where they do not apply. The appellant was found to have the right to seek relief in the Civil Court, which had jurisdiction over the matter. In conclusion, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment, restored the decree in favor of the appellant, and granted the respondent time until June 30, 1975, to vacate the building. The appellant was awarded costs of the trial Court, First Appellate Court, and High Court, while each party was to bear their own costs in the Supreme Court.
|
