LexVASANT PRATAP PANDIT versus DR. ANANT TRIMBAK SABNIS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
t ) 1 V ASANT PRAT AP PANDIT v. DR. ANANT TRIMBAK SABNIS APRIL 12, 1994 [S. MOHAN AND M.K. MUKHERJEE, JJ.] Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947-Sections 5( 11) (c) and 15-Bequest of tenancy rights under-Whether pennissible-Held, No-Words 'assign' and 'transfer' in Section 15--Whether A B include 'bequest-:-Held, Yes. C Wards and Phrases : 'assigned' and 'transfer~eaning of in the .. context-Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging of House Rates Control Act, 1947, Section 15: The tenant of the disputed premises died issueless leaving behind a D will bequeathing her properties, including tenancy rights in the premises, to her sister's son and appointing the plaintiff appellant as executor thereof. The defendant and his wife were staying with the deceased in the disputed premises. After her death, the appellant called upon the defen- dant to vacate the premises and on his refusal instituted a suit for eviction. E The defendant resisted the suit principally on the ground, that the bequest of the tenancy rights amouuted to 'transfer' and it was impermissible u/s 15 of the Bombay Rent Control Act. Negativing the contention the Trial Court deereed the suit. Ju appeal the High Court held that the word 'heir' appearing in F Section 5(1l)(c) of the Act did not include 'Legatee' and that the words 'assign' and 'transfer' appearing in Section 15 of the Act were used in a generic sense to include bequest. The High Court concluded that the appellant had no right lo tile the suit. In the appeal to this Court, appellants contended that having G regard to the paramount object of the Act to give protection from eviction to the family members of the deceased tenant the expression 'heir' occur- ring in Section S(ii) (c) should be construed widely to include not any and every legatee under a will, but family members of the tenant, and that the word 'transfer' appearing in s.15 of the Transfer of Property Act should H 451 452 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1994) 3 S.C.R. A be applied so as to interpret the word to mean acts done inter-vivos. On the questions whether tenancy rights under the Act can be devised by a will; and whether the words 'assign' and 'transfer' in Section 15 of the Act include 'bequest'. B Disposing of the matter, this Court HELD : 1.1. When Section 15, of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and \ Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 which prohibits sub-letting, as- signment or transfer, is read in juxtaposition with Clause 5(11)(C) (i) it is C patently clear that the legislature intends that in case no member of the family as referred to in the first part of the clause is there the 'heir', who under the ordinary mode of succession would necessarily be a relation of the deceased, should be treated as a tenant of the premises subject, however, to the decision by the Court in default of agreement. The words 'as may be decided in default of agreement by the Court' as appearing in D · Sec. 5(11)(C) (i) are not without significance. These words have been incorporated to meet a situation where there are more than one heir. In such an eventuality the landlord may or may not agree to one or the other of them being recognised as a 'tenant'. In case of such disagreement the Court bas to decide who is to be treated as 'tenant'. Therefore, if 'here' is E to include a legatee of the will then the above quoted words cannot be applied in case of a tenant who leaves behind more than one legatee, for in that case the wishes of the testator can get supplanted, on the landlord's unwillingness· to .respect the same, by the ultimate decision of the Court. [pp. 460-F-H; 461-A-B] F 1.2. It is not the heirship but the nature of claim that is determina- tive. The Legislature could not have intended to confer such a right on the testamentary heir. Otherwise, the right of the landlord to recover posses- sion will stand excluded even though the original party (the tenant) with whom the landlord had contracted is dead. Besides, a statutory tenancy is G personal to the tenant. In certain contingencies as contemplated in Section 5(11)(C)(i) certain heirs are unable to succeed to such a tenancy. To this extent, a departure is made from the general law. (461-C-D] 1.3. The matter may be viewed from another angle also. If the word 'heir' is to be interpreted to include a 'legatee' even a stranger may have H to be inducted as a tenant for there is no embargo upon a stranger be
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.