9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (2) TMI 1123 - SC - Indian LawsFulfillment of the conditions of Thika Tenant - whether Appellants come within the meaning of Thika Tenant ? - Held that - We hold that the Appellants fulfill all the conditions of Thika Tenant and come within the meaning of Thika Tenant as defined in Section 2(5) of the Calcutta Thika Tenancy Act, 1949. Further, in view of the Calcutta Thika & other Tenancies and Lands (Acquisition and Regulation) Act, 1981 since 18 January, 1982, the land in question vests in the State along with interests of the landlord therein free from all encumbrances. As the High Court failed to appreciate the relevant provisions and erred in holding that the Appellant is not Thika Tenant within the meaning of Section 2(5), we set aside the impugned judgment passed by the Division Bench of High Court of Calcutta and uphold the order passed by the Tribunal. The appeal is allowed. - Decided in favour of assessee
Issues Involved:
1. Whether the Appellants are 'Thika Tenants' within the meaning of Section 2(5) of 1949 Act or Section 3(8) of 1981 Act. 2. Whether the land in question stood vested with the State pursuant to provisions of the 1949 or 1981 Act. Detailed Analysis: 1. Whether the Appellants are 'Thika Tenants' within the meaning of Section 2(5) of 1949 Act or Section 3(8) of 1981 Act: The Appellants argued that the phrase 'any structure' in Section 2(5) of the 1949 Act includes both Kutcha and Pucca structures, based on plain language interpretation. They contended that their lease, which began in 1973 and allowed construction on the land, qualifies them as Thika Tenants under the 1949 Act and, subsequently, the 1981 Act. The Respondents countered that the Appellants constructed a Pucca structure for factory use, which does not qualify as Thika Tenancy. They also noted that the lease expired in 1993, and the Appellants only claimed Thika Tenancy in 2003, long after the lease ended. The State supported the Appellants' view, emphasizing that 'any structure' in the 1949 Act includes Pucca structures and that the 1981 Act's definition of Thika Tenant includes the Appellants. The court examined the statutory provisions and previous judgments, noting that earlier interpretations by the Calcutta High Court limited 'any structure' to Kutcha structures. However, the court found that the language of Section 2(5) is clear and unambiguous, and 'any structure' should include both Kutcha and Pucca structures, provided they are for residential, manufacturing, or business purposes. The court concluded that the Appellants meet the criteria for Thika Tenants under Section 2(5) of the 1949 Act, as they held land under another person, paid rent, and erected a structure for business purposes. 2. Whether the land in question stood vested with the State pursuant to provisions of the 1949 or 1981 Act: The 1981 Act aimed to acquire interests of landlords in lands comprised in Thika Tenancies for development and equitable utilization. Section 5 of the 1981 Act, effective from 18 January 1982, states that such lands and the landlords' interests therein vest in the State free from all encumbrances. The court reviewed the statutory provisions and found that the 1981 Act's definition of Thika Tenant includes the Appellants. Consequently, the land in question, along with the landlords' interests, vested in the State from 18 January 1982. Conclusion: The court held that the Appellants are Thika Tenants under Section 2(5) of the 1949 Act and Section 3(8) of the 1981 Act. The land in question vested in the State from 18 January 1982. The High Court's judgment was set aside, and the Tribunal's order was upheld, confirming the Appellants' status as Thika Tenants and the vesting of the land in the State. The appeal was allowed with no order as to costs.
|
