NEMAI CHANDRA KUMAR & ORS. versus MANI SQUARE LTD. & ORS.

Citation: [2015] 2 S.C.R. 650 · Decided: 24-02-2015 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. J. MUKHOPADHAYA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2015] 2 S.C.R. 650 
NEMAI CHANDRA KUMAR & ORS. 
v. 
MANI SQUARE LTD. & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 2402 of 2015) 
FEBRUARY 24, 2015 
[SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA AND 
A 
B 
PRAFULLA CHANDRA PANT, JJ.] 
C 
Calcutta Thika Tenaricy Act, 1949-'- s. 2(5) - Calcutta Thika 
and Other Tenancies and Lands (Acquisition and Regulation) 
Act, 1981 - s.3(8) - Thika Tenant- Land owner leased the 
premises on rent for 20 years to the appellant - Lessees-
D 
appellants given right to raise construction on the said 
property but on expiry of the lease were to deliver the vacant 
and peaceful possession of the property - Lessees raised 
pucca structure on the said premises for running its factory 
activities - Meanwhile, 1981 Act and 2001 Act coming into E 
force - Thereafter, lessees claiming themselves as Thika 
Tenants of the said premises - Controller declared lessees 
as Thika Tenants-Said order upheld by the tribunal, however, 
the High Court set aside the same - On appeal, held: 
Appellants fulfilled all the conditions of Thika Tenant and F 
came within the meaning of Thika Tenant as defined in s.2(5) 
of the 1949 Act- In view of the 1981 Act since 18. 1. 1982, the 
said land stood vested with the State along with interests of 
the landlord therein free from all encumbrances - Thus, the G 
order passed by the High Court set aside and that by the 
tribunal upheld - West Bengal Thika Tenancy (Acquisition 
and Regulation) Act, 2001. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
650 
H 
651 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2015] 2 S.C.R. 
A 
HELD: 1.1 The language of section 2(5) of the 
Calcutta Thika Tenancy Act, 1949 defining 'Thika Tenant' 
is fairly and reasonably clear. The said Section also 
reflects the intention of the legislature. The meaning of 
the word 'any structure' used in section 2(5) cannot be 
B derived in isolation on mere presumption. The 1949 Act 
was enacted to make better provisions relating to the 
law of the landlord and the tenant in respect of Thika 
Tenancy. To claim rights of a 'Thika Tenant' a person 
C should be a 'Thika Tenant' under section 2(5) of the 1949 
Act for which he should satisfy the given conditions. 
[Para 22] [674-B-C] 
1.2 The word 'any structure' relates to structure erected 
0 or acquired by purchase or gift on such land for a 
residential, manufacturing or business purpose. 'Any 
structure' mentioned therein has a direct relationship 
with the purpose for which the structure is erected or 
acquired i.e. for a residential, manufacturing or business 
E purpose. The words 'any structure' has no bearing with 
the nature of structure i.e. whether it is 'Kutcha' 
(temporary) or 'pucca' (permanent). If such 'any structure' 
was erected or acquired not for residential, 
manufacturing or business purpose, the person who is 
F holding land cannot claim to be a 'Thika Tenant' within 
the meaning of. section 2(5) even if other conditions 
mentioned therein are fulfilled. [Para 23] [674-H; 675-A-
B] 
G 1.3 The Calcutta Thika Tenancy Act, 1949 was amended 
in 1953 and 1969. By the West Bengal Act, XXIX of 1969 
definition of 'pucca structure' was inserted under Section 
2(4) as Section 2(4a). By the same very amendment of 
1969, Section 10A was inserted empowering the 'Thika 
H Tenant' to erect pucca structure for using residential 
NEMAI CHANDRA KUMAR v. MANI SQUARE LTD. 
652 
purpose with the previous permission of the Controller. A 
The insertion of Section 2(4a) and Section 1 OA by West 
Bengal Act XXIX of 1969 also makes the intention of 
legislature clear that for the purpose of thika tenancy, 
'any structure' includes both 'kutcha' (temporary) or 
'pucca' (permanent) structure. [Para 26] [675-F-H; 676-
B 
A; 677-C] 
1.4 The appellants fulfill all the conditions of 'Thika 
Tenant' and come within the meaning of 'Thika Tenant' 
as defined in section 2(5). Further, in view of the Calcutta C 
Thika and other Tenancies and Lands (Acquisition and 
Regulation) Act, 1981since18th January, 1982, the land 
in question vests in the State along with interests of the 
landlord therein free from all encumbrances. As the High D 
Court failed to appreciate the relevant provisions and 
erred in holding that the appellant is not 'Thika Tenant' 
wit~in the meaning of Section 2(5), the impugned 
judgment is set aside and the order passed by the 
. tribunal is upheld. [Para 28] [677~E-G] 
E 
Kshiroda Moyee v. Ashutosh Roy 63 CWN 565; 
Monmatha Nath Mukherjee v. Banarasi and Ors. 63 
CWN 824 - disapproved. 
Annapurna Seal v. Tincowri

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