LexRAJ KISHORE TEWARI versus GOVINDARAM BHANSALI
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
l • / 5 S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 121 was made. It would be a matter for consideration 1963 at the appropriate time whether there can be any -- exception to this general rule that the entire property Bhagwati Prasad sold must be pre-empted by the pre-emptor in his Sah suit. v. · . . Bhagwati Prasad I would therefore rest my dec1S1on on the facts s: h that the sale of the lease-hold interest in land is not _a_ pre-emptible and that the super-structure of the house Raghubar Dayal is also not pre-emptible and that therefore the plaintiff- J pre-emptor cannot pre-empt the sale of the property · sold. I therefore agree that the appeal be allowed, the decrees of the Subordinate Judge and the High Court be set aside and that of the trial Court be restored and that the appellants would have their costs through- out. Appeal allowed. RAJ KISHORE TEWARI v. GOVINDARAM BHANSALI (P.B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, K. SUBBA RAO, K.N. WANCHOO, J.C. SHAH AND RAGHUBAR DAYAL JJ.) West Bengal Premises Rent Control (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1950 (Act 17of1950), s. 13 (2).-Determination of sub tenancy- Whether tenancy starts from the date of ejectment of the tenant of the first degree-Effect of s. 13 (2). The appellant was a sub-tenant of S on a monthly basis com- mencing from April I, 1954. S was the tenant of the Respondent from September 15, 1943 on a monthly rental. On June 16, 1955, the respondent obtained a decree of ejectment against S. In view of sub-s(2) of s. 13 of the West Bengal Premises Rent Control (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1950, the appellant became the tenant of the respondent after the determination of the tenancy of S . The respondant gave a notice to the appellant asking him to deliver posse\sion of the premises on the expiry of the last day of April 1963 October JO 1963 Raj Kishore Tewari v. Govinda Ram Bhansali 122 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1964] 1957, since he being a statutory tenant had not paid rent since June 16, 1955. The respondant instituted a suit for ejectment, which was decreed, and an appeal to the High Court by the appellant was unsuccessful. On appeal by special leave, it was contended that the notice was invalid for under the law the notice must be to require the appellant to deliver possession on the expiry of the month of tenancy, that the tenancy was from the 16th of a month as the decree for ejectment against S was passed on June 16, 1955 and that this notice required the delivery of possession on the expiry of the last day of April. Held: The contention was untenable and rightly rejected by the High Court. The provisions of Sub-s. (2) of s. 13 of the West Bengal Rent Control (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1950 only lay down that the sub-tenant would become the tenant of the landlord if the tenancy in-chief is determined, on the same terms and conditions on which the sub-lessee would have held under the tenant if the tenancy of the tenant had not been determined. This means that the terms and conditions of the tenancy between the erstwhile sub-tenant and the landlord continue to be the same which were the terms and conditions of the sub-tenancy. The period of monthly tenancy commencing from the first of the month and expiring on the last day of the month, was in no way affected by the provisions of Sub-s. (2) of s. (13) whose effect was simply that the sub-tenant instead of being sub-tenant of the tenant who had been ejected, got a direct connection with the landlord and became his tenant-in- chief. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 150 of 1963. Appeal by special leave from the judgment and decree dated January 9, 1962 of the Calcutta High Court in Appeal from Original Decree No. 48 of 1961. N.C. Chatterjee, R.K. Garg, S.C. Agarwal, M.K. Ramamurthi and D.P. Singh, for the appellant. M.C. Setalvad and B.P. Maheshwari, for the res- pondent. October 10, 1963. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Raghubar Dayal RAGHUHAR DAYAL J.-Raj Kishore Tewari, J. appellant in this appeal by special leave, was occupy- ing certain premises as sub-tenant of Susil Chandra Banerjee, under a registered lease dated April 10, 1954. His tenancy commenced from April 1, 1954. The rent fixed was Rs. 220 per mensem. Subsequent- J • l 5 S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 123 ly it was reduced to Rs. 205 by an agreement dated 1963 June 9, 1954. The tenancy was monthly. Raj Kishore Susil Chandra Banerjee was the ten
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.