9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (2) TMI 587X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ture rent. The Court below after hearing the parties, by order dated 21-5-1984, directed the defendant-petitioner to deposit the rent from the date of filing of the suit, i.e., from Feb, 1983 to May, 1984 and also the current rent in terms of the aforesaid section. The defendant deposit the same. 3. On 29-11-1994, the plaintiff again filed a petition for a direction to the defendant-petitioner (o deposit the arrears of rent prior to the institution of the suit stating therein that due to over-sight no order could be passed in respect of arrears of rent prior to the institution of the suit. A rejoinder was filed by the defendant-petitioner. The Court below, after hearing the parties, by the impugned order, has directed the petitioner to deposit the arrears of rent for the said period. 4. The petitioner challenged the aforesaid order in this Court on the ground that no order for depositing the arrears of rent prior to the institution of the suit can be passed under Section 15 of the Act. He relied upon a judgment of the learned single Judge of this Court in the case of Raghubir v. Surya Narayan Gupta, reported in 1985 Pat LJR 346 : (AIR 1986 Pat 17), wherein, it was held that the C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 317 (supra). 8. The learned counsel appearing for the landlord-opp. party, on the other hand, combated the aforesaid propositions and contended that the provision of Secion 15 of the Act empowering the Court to direct the tenant to deposit the arrears of rent even for the period prior to the institution of the suit, subject to law of limitation, does not suffer from arbitrariness. On the other hand, the said provision has been added to shorten the litigation or to prevent multiplicity of the suit and allowing the tenant to continue in possession of the premises during the pendency of the suit on the payment of the current rent as well as the arrears of rent lawfully recoverable. The direction to the tenant to deposit the arrears of rent is given by the Court after hearing the parties and as such the procedure provided under Section 15 of the Act is not unjust and unfair. He also contended that in a suit where arrears of rent is also claimed as one of the reliefs in the suit then after filing of the suit the running of limitation for the said relief remains suspended during the pendency of the suit and in such a situation the running of time under Section 15 of the Act shall remain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order for arrears of rent also apart from the current and future rent. The term "arrears of rent" was not free from ambiguity. This Court took the view that if the tenant wants to contest the suit for ejectment and .remain in the building then he has to pay all the dues on account of arrears of rent, even if barred by limitation, current rent and future rents. (See 1967 BLJR 397, Bhola Nath Tiwari v. Kuer Rupnarain Singh Tiwari). Later on, a Division Bench of this Court took the view in the ease of Sashodhar Das v. Harihar Prasad, AIR 1973 Pat 361 that only such arrears of rent accrued due prior to the institution of the suit may be ordered to be deposited which can be legally recovered by the landlord and is not barred by any law. 12. In view of the divergent views the matter was considered by a Full Bench of this Court in the case of Ramnandan Sharma alias Ram Nandan Lohar v. Mostt. Maya Devi, 1974 BBCJ 818: (AIR 1975 Pat 283); wherein it was held that the arrears of rent occurring in Section 11A must be interpreted to mean the arrears of rent falling due during the pendency of the suit. To permit the expression to embrace within its ambit, the arrears of rent which ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is satisfied that any dispute referred to in Sub-section (2) has been raised by a tenant for reasons which are false or frivolous the court may order the defence against the eviction to be struck off and proceed with the hearing of the suit as laid down in Sub-section (1)." 13. From the perusal of the provision of Section If A of 1947 Act, 13 of 1977 Act and the present section it would appear that the words "subject to the law of limitation" and "both before and after institution of the suit" were not in the earlier sections. 14. The question to be considered is as to whether the addition of these two expressions have made any difference and has enlarged the scope of the section to the extent that the court can also pass an order for payment of arrears of rent even prior to the institution of the suit subject to the law of limitation. It is not challenged and in my view, rightly by learned counsel for the petitioner that there is lack of legislative competence in the legislature to make a law on the subject. Section 15 of the Act in clear words empowers the court to pass an order even with regard to arrears of rent prior to the institution of the suit. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... narch. Where an act is arbitrary, it is implicit in it that it is unequal both according to politieal logic and constitutional law and is therefore violative of Article 14." Article 14 strikes at arbitrariness in State action and ensures fairness and equality of treatment. The principle of reasonableness, which legally as well as philosophically, is an essential element of equality or non-arbitrariness pervades Article 14 like a brooding omnipresence and the procedure contemplated by Article 21 must answer the test of reasonableness in order to be in conformity with Article 14. It must be "right and just and fair" and not arbitrary, fanciful or oppressive; otherwise, it would be no procedure at all and the requirement of Article 21 would not be satisfied." 16. It is to be stated that there is presumption of constitutionality/validity of a statute and burden of proving constitutional invalidity is upon whom who challenges the validity. 17. The Act has been enacted to protect the tenant from unreasonable eviction. However, certain provisions have been incorporated for the benefit of the landlord. Section 15 is one of such provision which entitles the landlord t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he law laid down in the case of Ratan Lal Nai (AIR 1990 Pat 107) (supra) and, accordingly, hold that the provision of Section 15 of the Act regarding direction to the tenant to deposit arrears of rent even prior to the institution of the suit subject to law of limitation does not suffer either from arbitrariness or unreasonableness and the same is a valid piece of legislation and the Court has power to direct the tenant to deposit the rent even prior to the institution of the suit subject to law of limitation. 20. Answer to the second point depends upon the determination of two questions, namely, as to from which date the period of limitation is to be counted with regard to arrears of rent and as to whether the law of limitation is applicable to the claim of arrears of rent both before and after the institution of the suit. 21. Before adverting to the provisions of Section 15 of the Act with a view to find out answer to the said questions, it will be apt to state, in brief, the law regarding interpretation of the statute. The intention of the legislature is to be gathered from the language itself. If the language or words are plain, clear, unambiguous and explicit and the meaning ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ...... A Judge should ask himself the question how if the makers of the Act had themselves come across, this ruck in the texture of it, they would have strengthened it out? He must then do as they would have done. A Judge must not alter the material of which the Act is woven, but he can and should iron out the creases." 24. The aforesaid observation regarding interpretation by Lord Denning were adopted and approved by the Apex Court in several cases. Reference in this connection may be made to the recent decision of the Apex Court in the case of Directorate of Enforcement v. Deepak Mahajan, AIR 1994 SC 1775, wherein the Apex Court held as follows (at p. 1785 of AIR): - "True, normally Courts should be slow to pronounce the legislature to have been mistaken in its constantly manifested opinion upon a matter resting wholly within its will and take its plain ordinary grammatical meaning of the words of the enactment as affording the best guide, but to winch up the legislative intent, it is permissible for Courts to take into account of the ostensible purpose and object and the real legislative intent. Otherwise, a bare mechanical interpretation of the words and applicatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the same it is difficult to arrive at a conclusion as to from which date the period of limitation is to be counted for the purpose of deposit of arrears of rent. It is also not possible to come to a definite conclusion from the reading of the said section as to where the period of limitation governs the claim of arrears of rent of both prior to and after the institution of the suit or only prior to the institution of the suit. 27. In such a situation rules to interpretation has to be resorted to find out the intendment, object or the purpose of the Act. 28. Section 11A of the 47 Act contained the provision empowering the Court to pass an order for payment of arrears of rent without stating as to whether the arrears of rent is with regard to the period prior to institution of the suit or after the institution of the suit. The said provision gave rise to a conflicting judgments and this Court, as stated above, held in some cases that the order can be passed for payment of arrears of rent even prior to institution of the suit even beyond the period of limitation. Some of the decision took the views that the orders for depositing only such arrears of rent prior to institution of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs of rent during the pendency of the suit is concerned, the legislature never intended that same should be subjected to law of limitation. The order for payment of rent during the pendency of the suit for any period even beyond the period oflimitation if found due is neither unjust nor oppressive to the tenant, as he is required to pay the same in lieu of his occupation of the building during the pendency of the suit. The law laid down by this Court in the case of Ramnandan Sharma (AIR 1975 Patna 283) (FB) (supra) that the claim for arrears of rent during the pendency of the suit is not circumscribed by law of limitation still holds the field and the addition of the aforesaid expression has not made any change with regard to the said law. There is nothing in Section 15 of the Act to show that legislature intended to unsettle the law on this point. If the legislature wanted to make the arrears of rent accruing during the pendency of the suit also subject to law of limitation then it could have expressed its intention by saying that the period of limitation for arrears of rent be counted with from the date of application or from the date of passing of the order. Absence of this prov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rpose and object of the provision, I hold that Section 15 of the Act empowers the Court to pass an order for arrears of rent even prior to the institution of the suit for a period not barred by limitation as well as for arrears of rent and rent by month to month during the pendency of the suit. The expression "subject to law of limitation" applies only with regard to claim of arrears of rent prior to the institution of suit. The claim for arrears of rent during the pendency of the suit is not controlled or circumscribed by period of limitation. I may add here that while construing the provision, I have not lost sight of the fact that the primary object of the Act is the protection of the tenant. The view taken by me does not defeat the said object as it does not cause injustice to the tenant, on the other hand, it effectuates the purpose of Section 15 of the Act. 33. Coming to the facts of this case, it is evident that the plaintiff in the suit has claimed arrears of rent for the period to the institution of the suit from Feb. 1980 to June, 1983. He has filed an application under Section 15 of the Act for depositing the aforesaid arrears of rent. The arrears of rent, cla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
