AUNDIAPPA NADAR versus GNANAMBAL AMMAL AND ORS.

Citation: [1998] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 577 · Decided: 14-09-1998 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.B. MAJMUDAR · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

AUNDIAPPA NADAR 
v. 
GNANAMBAL AMMAL AND ORS. 
SEPTEMBER 14, 1998 
[S.B. MAJMUDAR AND M. JAGANNADHA RAO, JJ.) 
Tamil Nadu City Tenants Protection Act, 1921 (Act Ill of 1922)-Sec-
tion 9--Madras City Te11ants Protections (Ame11dme11t) Act, 1979 (Act II of 
1980)-Right of te11a11t to purchase property-Act III of 1922 as amended by 
Act 19/55, confers ce1tai111ights 011 the te11ant of the land to purchase propelty 
on putting up stmcture before 12.09. 1955 on the leased la11d-Land leased i11 
1954-Super Stmctztre consuucted by tenant in 1965 before Cllt-off date-Held, 
that Act II of 1980 extends the Cllt-off date and applies to all tenancies created 
before 3.3. 1980, e11titli11g tenant to purchase the said /a11d. 
Sectio11 3(iii)-Constntction made before 3.3. 198(}-ljnifonn retrospec-
tivil}~Section 3(iii) of Act II of 1980 amended Sectio11 1(3) of Pli11cipal 
Act,-Made Act retrospective for pe1iod antelior to 9.1.1974-Section 1(2) 
ca11not resfJict retrmpectivity created by Section 3(iii) of Act II of 198(}-Held, 
Act III of 1922 applies to all te11a11cy created before 3.3.1980 a11d dwi11g the 
pe1iod from 09.01.1974 to 03.03. 1980 i11 respect of areas to which the Act was 
applicable before 195~Matter remitted to tlial cowt for detem1inatio11. 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
The respondent filed suit for eviction on 22.06.1970 in respect of the 
tenanted portion i.e. B schedule. The notice for termination of tenancy was 
issued on 12.12.1968. The suit for injunction was filed restraining the 
F 
appellant from constructing structure in the encroached portion i.e. C 
schedule. The sum total of B schedule and C Schedule was described as A 
Schedule. As per the appellant, B Schedule was leased to him in 1954 and 
soon thereafter he had put up a structure and subsequently the respondent 
had orally leased the C schedule also. The appellant thereafter filed an 
application under Section 9 of the Tamil Nadu City Tenants Protection G 
Act, 1921, as amended by Act 19/55 claiming the right to purchase the 
entire A schedule. Such right was available to the tenant as per the 
amendment by Act 19/55 provided the tenancy in the land was created 
before 12.9.1955 and superstructure was also put up by the tenant before 
12.9.1955. 
H 
577 
578 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1998] SUPP. lS.C.R. 
A 
Trial court rejected the application of the appellant and decreed the 
eviction suit filed by the respondent. In appeal, the first appellate court 
dismissed the suit. The High Court set aside the appellate court judgment 
and restored the trial court judgment decreeing the suit in favour of the 
respondent. 
B 
In appeal to this Court, the appellant contended that the High Court 
as well as the trial court failed to refer to and consider the admission of 
the respondent that the appellant had put up a super structure in 1965. 
The appellant was entitled to take advantage of Madras City Tenants 
Protection (Amendment) Act, 1979 (Act II of 1980) which applied to 
C tenancies created after 12.9.1955 upto 09.1.1974. The High Court also failed 
to notice that B schedule was part of A schedule and that once C schedule 
was surrendered, the appellant could limit the plea of tenancy to B 
schedule. 
The respondent contended that the amending Act 11/80 being 
D retrospective only from 9.1.1974, and even if there was an admission that 
the appellant made a fresh construction in 1965, Act 11/1980 could not 
apply to tenancies created or superstructures constructed during the 
period 12.9.1955 to 9.1.1974. 
E 
Allowing the appeals, the Court. 
HELD : 1.1. The Amending Act 11/80 applies to all tenancies created 
before 3.3.1980 provided the construction is made before 3.3.1980 and 
before the date of termination of the tenancy i.e. 12.12.1968. It does not 
matter if the construction is after 12.9.1955. Act III of 1922 applies to all 
F tenancies created before 3.3.1980 and also applies to the tenancies created 
during the period from 9.1.1974 to 3.3.1980 in respect of areas to which the 
Act was applicable before 1955. (588-C-D] 
G 
Raja D. V. Appa Rao Bahadur v. C. T. Senthilnathan, (1988) 1 LW 400, 
affirmed. 
1.2. Decree for possession and profits as granted by the High Court 
in respect of "B" schedule is to be vacated and the decree of the lower 
appellate court is to be restored. [588-E] 
2. High Court was in error in taking B schedule and A schedule as 
H different properties. The B schedule was part of A schedule. The High 
~ 
AUNDIAPPA NADAR v. GNANAMBALAMMAL[M.
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.