9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (4) TMI 648X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be demolished, a ground contemplated under Clause (b) of sub-Section (1) of Section 12 of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (hereinafter 'the Act', for short). The landlord was successful in both the proceedings and vide the order dated 21.2.1986, the Rent Controller directed the two tenants to put the landlord in possession of the tenancy premises within one month from the date of the order. The tenants preferred appeals which were dismissed on 5.2.1987. The time appointed for compliance by the tenants was extended by one month. The tenants delivered possession over their respective shops to the landlord on 5.3.1987. The landlord gave an undertaking to the effect that on completion of the work of repairs and alteration etc. in the building the same will be offered to the tenants. 3. The work was completed by the landlord within six months. On 3.9.1987, the landlord sent an offer to each of the two tenants to occupy the rebuilt premises subject to payment of ₹ 2400/- p.m. by each of the two tenants. The area of the two shops in question before renovation was 27 ft. x 11 ft. = 297 sft. each. It appears that the building continues to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nants. The High Court has left it open to the landlord to take necessary steps for claiming fair rent from the tenants by approaching the Rent Controller for the purpose. Feeling aggrieved the landlord has come up in appeals by special leave. 5. Two questions arise for decision:- (1) Whether a new tenancy comes into existence, between the parties, on possession being restored to the tenant over the newly erected building or any part thereof, which would entitle the landlord to settle the rent and other terms of lease afresh? (2) What is the period of limitation for filing an application by the tenant seeking enforcement of the order of the Rent Controller made under Section 12 of the Act? 6. Both the abovesaid issues call for construing the provision enacted in Section 12 of the Act. 7. The Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act 1960 (Act No. 15 of 1960) was enacted to replace former two State enactments namely the Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent) Control Act, 1949 (Madras Act XXV of 1949) and the Hyderabad Houses (Rent, Eviction and Lease) Control Act, 1954 (Hyderabad Act XX of 1954) which were operating in two areas of the State namely the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al building unless such conversion is permitted by the Controller at the time of passing an order under sub-section (1). 8. In exercise of the power conferred by Section 30 of the Act, rules have been framed by the Government of Andhra Pradesh, called the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Rules, 1961. The relevant part of Rule 23, with which we are concerned, is extracted and reproduced hereunder:- 23. (1) Every application for the execution of orders passed under this Act shall be in writing signed and verified by the decree-holder and filed before the Controller within six months from the date of the order accompanied by a certified copy of the order concerned together with the necessary process fee: Provided that an application may be admitted after the specified period if the applicant satisfied the Controller that he has sufficient cause for not preferring the application within such period. (2) On receipt of an application for the execution of order as provided by sub-rule (1), the Controller shall ascertain whether all the requirements have been complied, and if they have not been complied, the Controller may reject the application or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by Section 111 of the T.P. Act is further restricted and fettered by the provisions of the Rent Restriction Act. In spite of the contract of lease having expired or terminated, the tenant ___ lessee continues in possession under the protective wing of the Rent Restriction Act until the lessee loses that protection. The lessee is not bound to vacate nor can the lessor-landlord exercises his right of re-entry unless a ground entitling him to do so within the meaning of the Rent Act has been made out and established in a court of law. The landlord-tenant relationship stands snapped and the tenancy comes to an end only on a decree or order in that regard being passed by a competent court. Thus, the contractual lease may have come to an end and the landlord-tenant relationship may have ceased to exist under the contract or the T.P. Act, yet the same continues to exist for the purpose of Rent Act. 12. With this much prefatory statement we proceed to examine the provisions of the A.P. Act. 13. The Heading given to Section 10 of the Act is ___ 'Eviction of tenants'. It confers a protection on the tenant to occupy the tenancy premises by providing that the tenant shall not b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and 13 are placed in close proximity and yet assigned different titles which is suggestive of the legislative intent that the subject-matter dealt with under the two headings, differently named, is different. A comparative reading of Section 10 with Sections 12 and 13 shows that while sub-section (2) of Section 10 contemplates the tenant being directed to put the landlord in possession of the buildings consequent upon a ground for eviction of tenant having been made out and the landlord having succeeded in making out a case for eviction of his tenant. And so, the delivery of possession by tenant to landlord is in effect eviction of tenant by landlord. The tenancy itself is determined. Under Sections 12 and 13 the Controller orders the tenant to deliver possession of the buildings to the landlord for a specific purpose and according to a calendar of events which binds the landlord and the tenant both. In other words, under Sections 12 and 13 the tenant is not evicted; the tenancy does not come to an end; the lease continues to survive; and yet the tenant ceases to be in actual possession of the building which is placed in possession of the landlord for a specified purpose. Under Cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he revision of rent cannot be insisted on by the landlord as a condition precedent to re-entry by the tenant. 17. Therefore, the landlord in the present case was not justified in offering the premises to the tenants for re-entry by qualifying the offer for payment of a higher rate of rent. 18. In Kondeti Suryanarayana and Ors. Vs. Pinninti Seshagiri Rao __ (1995) 2 Andh. L.T. 100, a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh noticed G.O.M. No. 636, G.A.D. dated 29.12.1983 which exempted newly constructed buildings from the operation of the Act, with effect from 26.10.1983, for a period of 10 years from the date on which their construction is completed. The Notification was issued in exercise of the power conferred by Section 26 of the Act. In the opinion of the learned Single Judge, inasmuch as the newly constructed building would remain exempted for a period of 10 years from the operation of the Act, it was not necessary for the landlord to give an undertaking as contemplated by sub-section (2) of Section 12 of the Act and the right of re-induction of the tenant remained suspended for a period of 10 years from the date of completion of the construction of build ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ontroller can also specify the date or time before the expiry of which the tenant must give response to the offer made by the landlord. 'Such period as may be specified by the Controller in this behalf'--the expression as employed in Sub-section (2) of Section 12 qualifies all the events within the scope of that provision. Once these dates have been specified there will be no difficulty of implementation. 21. Having reconstructed the premises totally anew, should the rent remain static? We can understand the premises being just repaired or only essential repairs having been carried out by the landlord in discharge of his obligation to secure peaceful enjoyment and possession of the tenancy premises by the tenant for the purpose for which the tenancy was created. So long as the premises remain the same, one can understand and assume that the rent appointed for the premises either by agreement or as fair rent has already taken care of the obligation of the landlord of maintaining the premises in good and habitable condition. In such cases, it may not be necessary to revise the rate of rent. However, when the premises have been added to, improved, altered or rebuilt consequ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o two parts, comprehending two situations, as under : (i) Where the fair rent of a building has been fixed under this Act, no further increase in such fair rent shall be permissible; except in cases (ii) where some addition, improvement or alteration has been carried out at the landlord's expense and if the building is then in occupation of a tenant, at his request. 23. The next following two provisos respectively lay down the formula for calculating the revision in rent and confer exclusive jurisdiction on the Controller to decide the dispute. 24. Sections 4, 5 and 6 are parts of one scheme. What first clause of sub-Section (1) of Section 5 provides is that the fair rent of a building having been fixed under Section 4 the same cannot be re- fixed once again. It is the rule of one-time fixation of fair rent. This rule does not apply to any case of addition, improvement or alteration having been carried out as stated in the later clause. It is an exception to 'one-time fixation of fair rent' rule. In spite of fair rent of building having been fixed already, the fair rent can be fixed again as per formula laid down in the proviso on an addition, improvement or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the period for completion of building by landlord may itself be more than six months and the period of limitation for tenant if governed by Rule 23 would have already expired by that time. An application filed before Rent Controller can attract applicability of Limitation Act, 1963 (See Mukri Gopalan Vs. Cheppilat Puthanpurayil Aboobacker). There are three single-Judge Bench decisions of Andhra Pradesh High Court, namely, K.S. Hanumantharayappa Vs. A.N. Vittal Rao 1987 (1) ALT 474, K. Manik Rao and Ors. Vs. Smt. M. Bikshapamma Anr. 1987 (2) ALT 15 and Navin Chandra Vs. Smt. Prema Bai Pitti 1992(3) ALT 181, taking the view that the limitation for application by tenant seeking restoration of possession to him is governed by Rule 23. These decisions do not lay down the correct law and are overruled. 27. However, we hasten to add that the tenant must exercise his right to recover possession within the time appointed by the Controller for the purpose or if no such time is appointed then within a reasonable time and promptly on receiving offer from the landlord in that regard failing which the right of the tenant to seek restoration of possession shall be lost. The tenant who has a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
