9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (10) TMI 37X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the contents of the affidavit and the counter affidavit together with all other relevant material documents available on record in the form of typed set of papers. I have also taken into consideration the various points raised by learned counsel appearing for the respective parties during the course of their arguments. In the above facts and circumstances of this case the only point that arises for consideration herein is as to whether there are any valid grounds to allow this writ petition or not. The brief facts of the case of the petitioner herein as seen from the affidavit are as follows: The petitioner-company is a wholly owned Government of India enterprise and is engaged in manufacture and supply of life saving drugs to Governmental institutions as well as public. The petitioner has got a regional office at 109 Anna Salai Madras and it has been in occupation of the said premises from August 1972. The total area occupied by the petitioner is 6 340 sq.ft. and it is paying rent of Rs. 5,833 per month. Originally there was a lease agreement between the petitioner and the owners of the premises and the said lease expired during 1980. Thereafter the petitioner continued as s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to summarily dispossess a tenant if necessary by using force by requesting the services of a police officer. It is stated by the petitioner that even buildings owned by the Central or the State Government are not exempt from the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act. Therefore it is their contention that even the first respondent can evict a person in respect of a building vested in the Central Government under section 269UD(1) of the Act only by the procedure laid down in the Tamil Nadu Act No. 18 of 1960. It is also contended by the petitioner that Parliament has no legislative competence to enact law on relationship of landlord and tenant. The power to regulate the relationship between the landlord and the tenant vests with the State Legislature under entry 18 of List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution. This entry specifically includes the relationship of landlord and tenant which takes within its ambit tenancy legislation pertaining to land and building. It is stated by the petitioner that the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, consolidates the law relating to regulation of the letting of residential and non-resi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e in C. B. Gautam vs Union of India [1993] 199 ITR 530 it is contended by the Department that the Supreme Court has upheld the validity of the provisions of Chapter XXC of the Act subject to the position that section 269UE(1) must be read without the expression "free from all encumbrances" with the result that the property in question will vest in the Central Government subject to such encumbrances and leasehold interests as are subsisting thereon except for such of them as had been agreed to be discharged by the vendor before the sale is completed. They also contend that according to the Supreme Court if under the relevant agreement to sell the property is agreed to be sold free of all encumbrances or certain encumbrances it would vest in the Central Government free of such encumbrances. Quoting the above Supreme Court decision, it is also contended by learned senior counsel for the Department that section 269UE(2) will have to be read down so that if the holder of an encumbrance or a lessee is in possession of the property and under the agreement to sell the property it is not provided that the sale would be free of such encumbrances or leasehold rights, the encumbrance holder or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce in such contention raised by the Department. In support of their case learned counsel for the petitioner herein strongly relies on the decision of the Supreme Court reported in the very same case C. B. Gautam vs Union of India [1993] 199 ITR 530 and contends that "an order for compulsory purchase results in the rights of holders of encumbrances and leasehold rights being destroyed or significantly diminished." It is significant to note that in the said case it has been held by the Supreme Court (at page 557) as follows : "It, therefore, appears to us difficult to uphold the last part of sub-section (1) of section 269UE in so far as it provides that the property in respect of which an order under sub-section (1) of section 269UE is made shall vest in the Central Government free of all encumbrances. In our opinion, the expression, 'free of all encumbrances' is liable to be struck down as arbitrary, without any rational nexus with the object of the legislation in question and violative of article 14 of the Constitution." Therefore it is contended by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the writ petition deserves to be allowed on the strength of the above decision ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 2(e) of the said Act as meaning any premises belonging to or taken on lease or requisitioned by or on behalf of the Central Government. Therefore, it is contended by the Department that for the abovesaid ground also the petitioner cannot claim any protection under the Tamil Nadu Rent Control Act from being evicted. I see every force in the said contention of learned counsel for the Department. Further, it is significant to note that Chapter XXC of the Act is in respect of the right granted to the Central Government for pre-emptive purchase of properties for various situations relating to the right of pre-emptive purchase which has been granted to the Central Government. Therefore in view of the provisions of Chapter XXC providing for a special mode of dispossession of tenants in regard to properties in respect of which an order of pre-emptive purchase has been made the said Chapter will override the provisions of all other enactments in that regard. In this regard it is contended by the Department that when Parliament inserted Chapter XXC by the Finance Act, 1986, with effect from October 1, 1986, it was aware of the provisions contained in the rent control enactments of the v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
