EMC STEEL LIMITED, CALCUTTA versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

Citation: [1991] 1 S.C.R. 381 · Decided: 13-02-1991 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. JAGANNATHA SHETTY · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

EMC STEEL LIMITED, CALCUTT A 
V. 
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. 
FEBRUARY 13, 1991 
iK. JAGANNATHA SHETTY, L.M. SHARMA AND 
B 
P.B. SAWANT, JJ.] 
Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958: Section 14D-Landlady-A 
-
---~- -- widow's right to seek eviction of tenant for own residence. 
.. 
This appeal has been filed against the judgment of the Delhi High 
Court whereby the High Court gave the widow-landlady the benefit of i C 
section 14-D of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 and accordingly 
granted her the possession of the premi_ses in question. 
Before this Court it was inter alia contended on behalf of the 
appellant that the relief under section 14-D was available only to a D 
landlady who had become a widow after the premises were let out either 
by herself or her husband. It was further contend~ that if the benefit 
given by section 14-D was allowed to be availed by all widows, they may 
1 
make a business of it. 
Dismissing the appeal, this Court, 
E 
HELD: (1) The legislature wanted to give a special privilege to the 
landlady who is a widow notwithstanding whether the premises were let _ 
out before or after she became widow. Such conferment of special 
benefit on a widow-landlady is permissible even under the provisions of ; 
Article 15(3) of the Constitution which is an express exception to the ' F 
provisions of sub-clauses (1) and (2) of that Article. A widow is 
undoubtedly a vulnerable person in our society and requires special -
_ protection. [383H-384BJ 
(2) Section 14-D can be availed of by the widow only once. That is 
a sufficient guarantee against the abuse of the privilege granted by the G 
section. Secondly, she has to prove her bona fide need for the occupa-
tion of the premises in question for her own residence like any other : 
landlord. Thirdly, the provisions of section 19 of the Delhi Rent Control 
Act come into play in her case also, when the order for possession on the , . 
ground of bona fide requirement for occupation as residence is made in : 
her favour. [3s4CJ 
I H 
381 
A 
382 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1991] 1 S.C:R. 
Dr. P.P. Kapur v. Union of India & Ors. Delhi High Court, Civil 
Writ No. 2686of1989 overruled. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 710 
of 1991. 
:B 
From the Judgme·nt and Order dated 8.5.1990 of the Delhi High 
c 
D 
Court in Civil Writ No. 3257 of 1989. 
G.L. Sanghi, Harish N. Salve, H.K. Puri, Rajeev Sharma, 
Ravinder Nath, V.B. Saharya, P.K. Jain and Prem Malhotra for the 
Appellants. 
Y.S. Chitale, T.S. Krishnamurthy Iyer, R.L. Jain, S.K. Tredal, 
Kitty Kumarmanglam, R.P. Dave and Ashok Mathur for the Res-
pondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
SAWANT,J. SLP(C)No.12111of1990. 
Leave gr·anted. 
2. This appeal ·raises the question of the validity and interpreta-
tion of Section 14-D of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter 
E 
referred to as the "Act"). In companion matters, we have already 
pronounced upon the validity and interpretation of Section 14-B of the 
Act. Hence, it is not necessary to discuss in this judgment the points 
which are common to both sections. These points will be deemed to 
have been concluded by the said decision. 
F 
G 
H 
3. The only point which remains to be dealt with and is peculiar 
to Section 14-D is whether to claim possession of such premises under 
the said Section, the landlady must become a widow after the premises 
are let out either by herself or her husband. 
4. Section 14-D of the Act reads as follows: 
"14-D. Right to recover immediate possession of premises 
to accrue to a widow-( 1) Where the landlord is a widow 
and the premises let out by her (2) or by her husband, are 
required by her for her own residence, she may apply to the 
Controller for recovering the immediate possession of such 
premises. 
EMC STEEL v. U.0.1. [SAWANT, J.] 
383 
(2) Where the landlord referred to in sub-section (1) has 
let out more than one premises, it shall be open to her to 
make an application under that sub-section in respect of 
any one of the premises chosen by her. 
5. The object of the Act, as stated in its preamble, is to provide 
A 
for the control of rents and evictions, and of rates of hotels and lodging 
B 
houses, and for the lease of vacant premises to Government, in certain 
."V'· areas in the Union Territory of Delhi. The original Act came into force 
on February 9, 1959 having received the assent of the President on 
December 31, 1958. The working of the Act disclosed certain 
deficiencies, inconveniences 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.