SRI SIDHHARTH VIYAS &ANR. versus RAVI NATH MISRA & ORS.

Citation: [2014] 13 S.C.R. 745 · Decided: 25-11-2014 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: T.S. THAKUR · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2014] 13 S.C.R. 745 
SRI SIDHHARTH VIYAS &ANR. 
v. 
RAVI NATH MISRA& ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 10529 of 2014) 
NOVEMBER 25, 2014 
[T. S. THAKUR, ADARSH KUMAR GOEL AND 
R. BANUMATHI, JJ.] 
A 
B 
Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, 
Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972- s. 12(3)- Whether s.12(3) of C 
the Act providing for 'deemed vacancy' is applicable to a 
situation where the tenant or a member of his family builds, 
acquires or otherwise gets a vacant building in the area 
concerned afte~ commencement of the tenancy but prior to 
application of the Act to the tenancy in question - Held: Object D 
of rent law is to balance the competing claims of the landlord 
on the one hand to recover possession of building let out to 
the tenant and of the tenant to be protected against arbitrary 
increase of rent or arbitrary ~viction, when there is acute E 
shortage of accommodation:..:.. Though, it is for the legislature 
to resolve such competing. claims in terms of statutory 
provisions,. while interpreting the provisions, the object of the 
Act has to be kept in view by the Court - Unless otherwise 
provided, a tenant who has already acquired altemative F 
accommodation is not intended to be protected by the Rent 
Act- Mere use of present tense in s. 12(3) is not intended to 
limit the applicability of the provision to acquisition of 
accommodation by the tenant after the Rent Act becomes 
applicable - View taken by High Court that acquisition of G 
alternative accommodation by the tenant, prior to 
enforcement of the Act, is not c.overed bys. 12(3) is not correct 
in law. 
H 
745 
746 
A 
B 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2014] 13 S.C.R. 
Interpretation of Statutes - Purposive approach vis 
literal approach -
Held: Grammar cannot control the 
interpretation of the provision which has to be read in the 
context -
Rent control -
Rent control legislation -
Interpretation of- Need for reasonable interpretation. 
Interpretation of Statutes - Proviso - Purpose and 
import of - Held: the scope of proviso is narrower than the 
main provision. 
Mangi Lal v. Addittional District Judge & Others 
. C 
(1980) Allahabad Rent Cases 55 -
partly 
overruled. 
Joginder Pal v. Naval Kishore Behul (2002) 5 SCC 
397 : 2002 (3) SCR 1078; Reserve Bank of India 
D 
v. Peerless General Finance & lnve.stment Co. 
Ltd. & Others (1987) 1 SCC 424: 1987 (2) SCR 
1 ; S. Sundaram Pillai & Others v. R. Pattabiraman 
& Othe'rs (1985) 1 sec 591 : 1985 (2) SCR 643-
relied on. 
E 
Goppumal v. Thakurji Shriji Shriji Dwarkadheeshji 
&Another(1969) 1SCC792: 1969 (3) SCR 989; 
Gajanan Dattatraya v. Sherbanu Hasang Patel & 
Others (1975) 2 SCC 668: 1976 (1) SCR 535 -
referred to. 
F 
Case Law Reference: 
(1980) ARC 55 
partly overruled 
Para 5 
1969 (3) SCR 989 
referred to 
Para 8 
G 
1976 (1) SCR 535 
referred to 
Para 8 
2002 (3) SCR 1078 relied on 
Para 12 
1987 (2) SCR 1 
relied on 
Para 13 
1985 (2) SCR 643 
relied on 
Para 16 
H 
SRI SIDHHARTHVIYASv. RAVI NATH MISRA 
747 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 
A 
10529 of 2014. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 07-05-2007 of the 
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Civil Misc. Writ 
Petition No. 47201 of 2002. 
J.N. Dubey, Sr. Adv., Anurag Dubey, Ms. Anu Sawhney, 
Meenesh Dubey, S.R. Setia, Advs. for the Appellants. 
H.C. Kharbanda, T.N. Saxena, Vipin Kumar Saxena, Yash 
Pal Dhingra, Ad vs. for the Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL J. 1. Leave granted. 
B 
c 
2. This appeal has been preferred against the Judgment 
and Order dated 7th May, 2007 of the High Court of Judicature D 
at Allahabad, Civil Side in Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition 
No.47201 of 2002. 
3. The question for consideration is whether Section 
12(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of 
Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (for short "the Act") 
E 
providing for 'deemed vacancy' is applicable to a situation 
where the tenant or a member of his family builds, acquires or 
otherwise gets a vacant building in the area concerned after 
commencement of the tenancy but prior to application of the 
Act to the tenancy in question. 
F 
4. Brief reference to facts giving rise to the question is 
necessary. The accommodation in question was let out for 
residential purpose w.e.f. 1st June, 1981 and was assessed 
for house tax for the first time on 1st October, 1983. Under G 
Section 2(2) of the Act, the Act which otherwise came into force 
on 15th July, 1972; was not applicable
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.