Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1968 (10) TMI 107

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pal Committee .for stoppage of the nuisance. On June 10, 1954, Muni Subrat and the tenants agreed in writing to refer the disputes between them to the arbitration of two named arbitrators. The landlord was not a party to the agreement. The arbitrators made their award on July 14, 1954. The award directed that (i) Muni Subrat would withdraw the applications pending before the Municipal Committee; (ii) the tenants would be at liberty to run the workshop during the day time upto December 31, 1957; (iii) on January 1, 1958, the tenants would remove the machinery; (iv) on the same date they would give vacant possession of the ground floor to the landlord and (v) the tenants would pay rent to landlord for the period of their occupation. The award .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... alidity of the award could not be agitated in the execution proceedings; (ii) the decree for eviction was passed in contravention of the Rent Act and was void; (iii) the appeal against the order allowing the landlord to execute the decree was incompetent and (iv) Muni Subrat was entitled to execute the decree for removal of the machinery but he could not execute the decree for eviction. In the result, he dismissed the appeal in part so far as it was directed against the landlord, allowed the appeal in part against Muni Subrat and declared that he could get the machinery removed but he could not claim eviction. The tenants and the decree-holders filed two separate appeals in the Punjab High Court at Delhi. Gurdev Singh J. held that (i) the f .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as to the validity of the award be raised after a decree is passed on the award, and can the decree be pronounced to be a nullity on the ground that it was based on an invalid award; (2) Is the decree directing the tenants to deliver possession of the premises to the landlord a nullity on the ground that it was passed in contravention of the Rent Act; (3) Is this portion of the decree enforceable either by the landlord or by Muni Subrat; and (4) Is the decree so far as it directs removal of the machinery valid and enforceable by Muni Subrat. 4. The award was filed in Court under Section 14 of the Arbitration Act and on notice to the tenants and in their presence a decree was passed according to the award under Section 17. It is not open .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he contrary contained in any other law or any contract, no decree or order for the recovery of possession of any premises shall be passed by any Court in favour of the landlord against any tenant (including a tenant whose tenancy is terminated): Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall apply to any suit or other proceeding for such recovery of possession if the Court is satisfied... Then followed a catalogue of grounds on which the decree for recovery of possession could be passed. The other sub-sections to Section 13 showed that a decree or order could be passed on one of those grounds in a suit or proceeding instituted by a landlord against a tenant. Section 13(1) prohibited the Court from passing a decree or order for recovery of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rictions (Amendment) Act, 1933, Section 3(1) was made to apply to these premises and that sub-section provided : 'No order or judgment for the recovery of possession of any dwelling house to which the principal Acts apply or for the ejection of a tenant therefrom shall be made or given unless the Court considers it reasonable to make such an order or give such a judgment.. and... 7. One or other of two additional conditions is satisfied. It is perfectly plain from what 1 have said that before the judgment in default of appearance was entered no court had determined whether it was reasonable to make such an order or give such a judgment. In my view, therefore, by express force of that section the judgment in default of appeara .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates