9911796707
TMI Blog1975 (8) TMI 129X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cree for eviction of the appellant from the suit premises. The respondent filed the suit against the appellant for possession of the premises on the ground that the appellant had sublet a portion of the premises. Section 13(1) (e) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House r Rates Control Act, 1947 which is the relevant section for the purpose of this appeal runs as follows : 13(1)(e) That the tenant has, since the coming into operation o this Act, unlawfully sublet, or after the date of Cr commencement of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control (Amendment) Act, 1973, unlawfully given on licence, the whole or part of the premises or assigned or transferred in any other manner his interest therein . The appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Decision of that High Court Maganlal Narandas Thakkar Anr. v. Arjan Bhanii Kanbi(1) (1) 1969 G.L.R. Vol. 10 p. 837. where it was held that the words has sublet in section 13(1) (e) of the Saurashtra Rent Control Act mean that a subletting has take place and as a result of that subletting the impediment in the way of the landlord to recover possession has been removed. The provisions contained in section 13(1)(e) of the Saurashtra Rent Control Act are r similar to the provisions contained in the Bombay Act; 1947. The High Court also held that the wards 'has sublet' do not include any element of the sub-tenancy being in existence at the date when the suit is filed. The appellant relied on a decision on this Court in Goppal v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... October, 1947 and on the Date of the subletting in 1944, no Rent Control Legislation was in force. lt is in that context that it is said that the words has sublet contemplate a completed event connected in some way with the present time . This Court said that the words has sublet take within their sweep any subletting which was made in the past and has continued upto the present time . What is meant by these observations is that the vice of subletting which fell within the mischief of the Act continues to be a mischief within the Act. In Goppulal's case (supra) there was no subletting in 1947 to violate the 1947 Jaipur Rent Control order and therefore there could not be any subletting which could continue upto the 1950 Rajasthan Ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
