LexN. MOTILAL & ORS. versus FAISAL BIN ALI & ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B C D E F G H 556 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 1 S.C.R. N. MOTILAL & ORS. v. FAISAL BIN ALI & ANR. (Civil Appeal No. 710 of 2020) JANUARY 30, 2020 [ASHOK BHUSHAN AND M. R. SHAH, JJ.] Telangana Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 – s.4 – Appellants are tenants of a shop on monthly rent of Rs.1840/- excluding electricity charges and water charges – Appellants had entered into lease agreement dtd. 27.08.90 with the landlord by which the premises was let out for 20 years – Previous landlord transferred the premises in question to respondent nos.1 & 2 on 28.03.08 – Respondent nos.1 & 2 filed application for enhancement of rent – Landlord claimed that the market rent of similar premises is Rs.75/- per sq. ft. and as per the market rent value, the monthly rent of the shop shall be Rs.29,250/- – Application allowed by Rent Controller – Fair rent fixed @ Rs.60/- per sq. ft i.e. Rs.23,400/- – Appeal filed by the appellants was dismissed – In civil revision petition, High Court remanded the matter back to Appellate Authority – Dismissed – High Court dismissed the revision petition filed by the appellants – Plea of appellants that the contract of tenancy entered on 27.08.90 was to subsist till 31.07.10, hence, the respondent-landlord had no authority to file application for enhancement of rent on 29.09.09 – Held: s.4 provides for determination of fair rent – It gives right to both the tenant and the landlord to make an application for fixing fair rent – Provision of s.4(1) cannot be read in a manner that it is not applicable with regard to contractual tenancy – Rent control legislations are enacted to protect both tenant and the landlord – Concept of determination of fair rent is to operate equal for the tenant as well as the landlord – Object of the Act is that neither the landlord should charge more than the fair rent of the premises nor tenant should be forced to pay higher rent than the fair rent – No merit in present appeal. [2020] 1 S.C.R. 556 556 A B C D E F G H 557 Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD : 1.1 Section 4 of the Telangana Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Rent, 1960 gives right to both the tenant and the landlord of a building to make an application for fixing fair rent. The provision of Section 4(1) cannot be read in a manner that it is not applicable with regard to the contractual tenancy. The Rent Control Legislations are enacted to protect both tenant and the landlord. In the event the submission of the appellants is accepted that during the currency of the contract of tenancy, no one can file application for fixing of fair rent, the said provision shall operate detrimental to both the tenant and the landlord. The concept of determination of fair rent is to operate equal for the tenant as well as the landlord. The object of the Act is that neither the landlord should charge more than the fair rent of the premises nor tenant should be forced to pay higher rent than the fair rent. The statutory scheme brought in the statute by way of Section 4 is beneficial both to the tenant as well as the landlord. [Para 9] [560-F-H; 561-A-B] M/s. Raval and Co. v. K.G Ramachandran (1974) 1 SCC 424 : [1974] 2 SCR 629 ; V. Dhanapal Chettiar v. Yesodal Ammal (1979) 4 SCC 214 : [1980] 1 SCR 334 – followed. Case Law Reference [1974] 2 SCR 629 followed Para 4 [1980] 1 SCR 334 followed Para 6 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 710 of 2020. From the Judgment and Order dated 30.08.2019 of the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad in CRP No. 1650 of 2019. Yelamanchili Shiva Santosh Kumar, Tarun Gupta, Advs. for the Appellants. Kiran Suri, Sr. Adv., Mullapudi Rambabu, N. Eswara Rao, Ms. Prity Kumari, Ms. Vijayshree Pattnaik, M/s. Rambabu & Co., Advs. for the Respondents. N. MOTILAL & ORS. v. FAISAL BIN ALI & ANR. A B C D E F G H 558 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 1 S.C.R. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by ASHOK BHUSHAN, J. 1. This appeal has been filed by the appellants, who are tenants of a non-residential building, challenging the judgment of the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad dated 30.08.2019 by which civil revision petition filed by the appellants challenging the order dated 30.04.2019 of the Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderbad has been dismissed. 2. Brief facts of the case necessary to be noted for deciding the appeal are: The appellants are tenants of a Shop No.M-1-938/39 admeasuring 390 sq. ft. in New Marketing Complex, Tilak R
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.