9911796707
TMI Blog1954 (5) TMI 20X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ajendragadkar and Chainani JJ. on the 8th of October, 1952. It was contended, inter alia, that even if it were held that the appellants had -accepted the sum of ₹ 2,400 they could not be said to have committed an offence under section 18(1) of the Act inasmuch as the amount could not in law be held to be a premium in respect of the grant of -a lease. On this point the learned Judged said as follows :- In the present case the work regarding the building which still remained to be done was so important that both the parties agreed that the complainant should get into possession after the said work was completed. In such a case unless the building is completed the tenant has no right which can be enforced in a Court of law. If the landlord finds it impossible for any reason to complete the building, what is the right which an intending tenant can enforce against him. Therefore, in our opinion, there is considerable force in the contention urged by Mr. Lulla that in the present case even if it be held that the accused had received ₹ 2,400 in the circumstances to which we have already referred that would not bring them within the mischief of section 18(1) because there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or in consideration of or as a condition of the grant of a lease. It has used an expression which has the widest connotation and means in its plain meaning connected with or attributable to, -and therefore it is not necessary that there must be simultaneous receipt by the landlord with the grant of the lease. So long as so me connection is established between the grant of the lease and the receipt of the premium by the landlord, the provisions of the section would be satisfied. In our opinion it is impossible to contend that in the present case there was no connection whatever between the landlord receiving the premium and his granting the lease of the premises. It is true that when he received the premium he did not grant a lease. It is true that all that he did when he received the premium was to enter into a contract with his tenant to grant a lease in future. But the object of the landlord in receiving the premium and the object of the tenant in paying the premium was undoubtedly on the part of the landlord the letting of the premises and oh the part of the tenant the securing of the premises. Therefore the object of both-the landlord and the tenant was the grant of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l of tenancy means the grant of tenancy after its termination; and continuance seems to contemplate continuance of a tenancy which is existing. Whether or not an executory agreement for grant of a lease comes within the ambit of the section by reason of the use of the words in respect of would be examined hereinafter. Before doing so it may be stated that an instrument is usually construed as a lease if it contains words of present demise. It is construed as an executory agreement, notwithstanding that it contains words of present demise, where certain things have to be done by the lessor before the lease is granted, such as the completion or repair or improvement of the premises, or by the lessee, such as the obtaining of sureties. (Vide Halsbury s Laws of England, Second Edition, Vol. 20, pp. 37-39). On the facts of this case therefore the Full Bench very rightly held that the oral, agreement made between the parties did not constitute a lease but it amounted to an agreement to grant a lease in future. It may further be pointed out that, in fact, in this case the lease never came into existence. Moreover, in view of the provisions contained in the Bombay Land Requisition A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elationship of landlord and tenant does not come into existence till a, lease comes into existence; in other words, there is no relationship of landlord and tenant until -there is a, demise of the property which is capable of being taken possession of If the Legislature intended to make receipts of money on executory agreements punishable, the section would have read as follows: receives any fine, premium or other like sum or deposit or any consideration other than the standard rent in respect of the lease or an agreement of lease of the premises, such landlord or person shall be punished in the manner indicated in the section. The section does not make the intention punishable; it makes an act punishable which act is related to the existence of a lease. It does not make receipt of money on an executory contract punishable; on the other hand it only makes receipt of money on the grant, renewal or continuance of the lease of any premises punishable and unless the lease come into existence no offence can be said to have been committed by the person receiving the money. It is difficult to hold that any relationship of landlord and tenant comes into existence on the execution of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ses were let to a tenant............ It is obvious that on the basis of an executory agreement the appellants would not be entitled to receive any rent. They would only be entitled to receive rent after the lease is executed and actual demise of the premises or their transfer is made in favour of the complainant. The definition of the expression tenant also suggests the same construction. Mr. Mehta for the State, besides supporting the emphasis placed by the High Court on the words in respect of, contended that that construction could be supported in view of the provisions of sub-section (3) of section 18 which is in these terms: 18(3)-Nothing in this section shall apply to any payment made under any agreement entered into before -the first day of September, 1940, or to any payment made by any person to a landlord by way of a loan, for the purpose of financing the erection of the whole or part of a residential building or a residential section of a building on the land held by him as an owner, a lessee or in any other capacity, entitling him to build on such land, under an agreement which shall be in writing and shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Indian Re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
