9911796707
TMI Blog1963 (2) TMI 75X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere were any other petitions of a similar type pending they may also be put up for hearing before the same Bench so that the counsel appearing in those petitions might have, if they so chose, an opportunity of representing their views before the Court. The facts of each case in certain particulars are different and as we are merely answering the question of law under reference, these cases will be disposed of by a Single Judge on their respective merits in the light of the answer which is being given by this Bench. 2. In all these cases, the plaintiffs were landlords who had instituted suits for the ejectment of their respective tenants, contending that the premises were required for their own use and the tenants had defaulted in making payment of rent. The suits were resisted by the tenants on the ground that a case for their eviction was not made out under the Rent Control Act, (Act 38 of 1952). 3. In Civil Revision No. 157-D of 1959, the defendant had denied being a defaulter or that the premises were required by the Landlords bona fide for their own use and occupation. A question was also raised that the landlords had no right to institute the suit and that the same was p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e property which has been transferred to another persona under the provisions of this Act. Such a person is deemed to be a tenant of the transferee on the same terms and conditions on which he was holding the property under the Central Government. This protection is, however, conditional on his not contravening the conditions given in the section. For facility of reference, Section 29 is given below in extenso : 29. Special protection from ejectment to certain classes of persons.--(1) where any person to whom the provisions of this section apply, is in lawful possession of any immovable property of the class notified under Sub-section (2), which is transferred to another person under the provisions of this Act, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law, such person shall, without prejudice to any other right which he may have in the property, be deemed to be a tenant of the transferee on the same terms and conditions as to payment of rent or otherwise on which he held the property immediately before the transfer: Provided that notwithstanding anything contained in any such terms and conditions no such person shall be liable to be ejected from the property during su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as contained in the Transfer of Property Act. The main ground advanced by the landlords in support of their claim was that the tenants had attorned to them and there was the relationship of landlord and tenant between them. In that view of the matter, the landlords contested, they were entitled to a decree for ejectment as they had served upon the tenants a notice terminating the tenancy in accordance with the ordinary law and had asked them to vacate the premises within a month. They were, therefore, entitled to eject their tenants and to recover vacant possession. 7. The first question, which arises under reference, is whether the ordinary law is open to a person who has not yet become a complete owner of the property by issue of sale certificate in his favour. In Bombay Salt and Chemical Industries v. L. J. Johnson, AIR 1958 SC 289 which was also a case under the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954, it was held that where in respect of the sale by auction of property of the class notified under Section 29(2) it is not shown that the sale certificate was issued to the highest bidder, nor that the balance of the purchase-money had been paid, it must be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ownership rights in a landlord is not the sine qua non of relationship of landlord and tenant. Thus, a person having possession of land without yet being its owner can allow that land to be occupied by a tenant giving rise to creation of mutual rights and obligations as between the lessor and lessee. One of the chief duties of the tenant is to pay rent while he is in the beneficial enjoyment of the premises. If a tenant is evicted, he is released from the obligation to pay rent, or if he commits default in payment of rent, he is liable to be evicted. This is generally so, apart from special statutory inhibitions against eviction. 9. One of the important incidents of this relationship is, that a tenant is estopped from denying the validity of his landlord's title unless he first surrenders possession to him. When a lessee is sued for rent, he cannot escape payment by taking the plea of want of title in the lessor. To this general principle, there are, however, well known exceptions which are not relevant for purposes of these cases e.g., the termination of lease, or acquisition by the lessee of a title paramount or the relationship having been vitiated by fraud or mistake. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... title by accepting the demise. A man in possession can exercise all the proprietary rights against everybody, except the rightful owner. The welt known attributes of title being jus utendi right of user, jus fruendi right to the fruit, jus disponendi right to transfer or dispose of the thing, jus vindicandi the power to assert in a Court of law a right in or to a thing. These rights come under three heads of possession, enjoyment and disposition. In the words of Holland, of the right to possess, little more need be said than that it includes, jus vindicandi. The right to claim or challenge or to attorn as one's own, is available to a person entitled to possession as much as to a person claiming superior title of ownership. This leads to the inevitable conclusion that a person having such a status, as landlords in the instant case, can claim recovery of possession from a tenant, who commits, a breach of his tenancy obligations, subject, of course, to a statute which may bar the remedy of ejectment. Such a person's right to the remedy is not taken away simply because the landlord has not yet perfected his title to complete ownership. 11. At this stage, the effect of at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e sole owner of the demised premises, or that he is a mere trustee. These principles are embodied in Section 116 of the Indian Evidence Act. There is ample authority for the proposition that a tenant who: has been let into possession cannot deny his landlord's title, however defective it may be, so long as he has not openly restored possession by surrender to his landlord. In the instant case, at the binding of the former landlord, i. e. the Government, the plaintiff, pending finalization of the sale, was given provisional possession and the tenant was asked to attorn to the plaintiff. After the attornment, the relationship between the contending parties is that of landlord and tenant regardless of the fact that the ownership rights have not yet vested in the landlord. The inchoate ownership is not a legal bar to the plaintiff exercising the rights of landlord against the tenant, and to the former, the remedy permitted by law against the tenant e. g. eviction cannot be denied on the ground of imperfect title because of the inchoate purchase. 12. The next question is, whether the protection, given to the tenant from eviction, under the Rent Restriction Act, avails, in a case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... these proceedings which cover a transitional stage -- e. g. after the possession has been delivered to the auction-purchaser but before he becomes owner in the eye of law as he has not yet got the sale certificate--can it be said to be the intention of the legislature to take away all protection from the tenant against his ejectment? In construing statutes, it is a fundamental rule that the Courts have to find out the legislative intent. The rules of construction and interpretation of statutes are in the nature of guides for discovering the legislative intent. The question of probing into the legislative mind, will only arise, where the language, by reason of ambiguity leaves room for doubt as to the meaning of the words in the enactment. It is not unoften that there is a divergence between legislative purpose and the legislative meaning. The legislative purpose of Rent Control Acts, including Delhi and Ajmer Rent Control Act, 1952 and Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, is to control the rents and to protect the tenants against eviction except in eventualities expressly provided in the Act. The Rent Control Acts and the rules made thereunder, override other laws to the extent of inconsi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion in a statute which cannot be supplied by construction. Even assuming that it was not the purpose of the Act to deprive the tenants of the auction purchaser, who had not yet become a complete owner, of the benefit of the Act which controls rents and evictions, the Court cannot supply the: lacuna, left by the legislature by inadevertence. Sometimes it happens, that legislature has not been able to foresee the missing case. The Courts, by supplying the omission in an Act of legislature, would be travelling far afield, and it would be open to serious objection, when the Courts deviate front their real function of construction and enter upon legislation which is obviously outside their purview. The Courts cannot say to themselves that through oversight the legislature has failed to provide for a particular situation and, therefore, what was not done by the legislature may be done by the Court. This does not lie within the judicial field. If the meaning of the statute is sensible without the omitted word, Courts will not be justified in making interpolations. The general rule in all such cases, is that a Court may interpret doubtful or obscure phrases in a statute so as to give effec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the meaning of the statutory text. If there is scope, the Courts try to avoid a construction which may lead to injustice or oppression or which may turn out to be contrary to public interest, but the Court is helpless where the language employed is clear, leaving no room for flexibility. As long ago as 1584 Lord Coke formulated the rule which still remains the keystone. He said in Heydon's case (1584) 76 ER 637, (at p. 638): And it was resolved by them, that for the full and true interpretation of all statutes in general (be they penal or beneficial, restrictive or enlarging of the common law) four things are to be discerned and considered : Ist. What was the common law before the making of the Act? 2nd. What was the mischief and defect for which the common law did not provide? 3rd. What remedy the Parliament hath resolved, and appointed to cure the disease of the commonwealth? And 4th. The true reasons of the remedy. And then the office of all the judges is always to make such construction as shall suppress the mischief, advance the remedy, and to suppress subtle invention and evasions for continuance of the mischief, and pro private commodo, and to add force and life ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
