WELFARE ASSOCN. A.R.P., MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. ETC. ETC. versus RANJIT P. GOHIL AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

Citation: [2003] 2 S.C.R. 139 · Decided: 18-02-2003 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R.C. LAHOTI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Cited by 5 judgment(s) · cites 3 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

WELFARE ASSOCN. A.R.P., MAHARASHTRA 
AND ANR. ETC. ETC. 
v. 
RANJIT P. GOHIL AND ORS. ETC. ETC. 
FEBRUARY 18, 2003 
[R.C. LAHOTI AND BRIJESH KUMAR, JJ.] 
A 
B 
Bombay Rents, Hotel, Lodging House Rates Control, Bombay, Land 
Requisition and Bombay Government Premises (Eviction) (Amendment) Act, C 
1996-Act amending certain provisions of Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging 
House Rates (Control) Act, 1947, Bombay Land Requisiiion Act, 1948 and 
Bombay Government Premises (Eviction) Act, 1955-Altering the basis of 
occupation of premises by occupants and declaring that requisitioning shall 
come to an end-Constitutional validity of-Held: The Act is intra vires the 
Constitution and thus valid. 
D 
Constitution of India, 1950: 
Article 246, Entries 6, 7, 13 of List 111 and Entry 18 of List 11 of Seventh 
Schedule-Legislative competence-Held: Power of the State Legislature is to 
legislate in respect of landlord and tenant found in entries 6, 7 and 13 of List- E 
111 of the Seventh Schedule-No voluntary transfer of property between owners 
and allottees-State Government in exercise of its power of eminent domain 
requisitioned the properties in public interest and allotted to occupants and 
paid compensation-Also privily of estate was compulsorily converted into 
privily of contract-Thus within the legislative competence of the State-
F 
Bombay Rents, Hotel, Lodging House Rates Control, Bombay, Land Requisition 
and Bombay Government Premises (Eviction) (Amendment) Act, 1996. 
Articles 245 and 246-Amending Act is merely placing additional 
restrictions on the right of the owners to seek eviction of the premises, thus 
is neither in conflict with the judgments of Supreme Court nor a piece of G 
colourable legislation-Bombay Rents, Hotel, Lodging House Rates Control, 
Bombay, Land Requisition and Bombay Government Premises (Eviction) 
(Amendment) Act, 1996. 
Article 246, Schedule Vll: 
139 
H 
140 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(2003] 2 S.C.R. 
~ 
A 
Enactment challenged with reference to entries in Schedule VII-Held: 
In such cases it is necessary to examine the pith and substance of the Act. 
Legislative entries-Interpretation of-Held: Entries should be widely 
... 
interpreted making them meaning/UI and effective-Transgression into the 
B 
field of another entry placed in another list is to be avoided-Interpretation 
of statutes. 
Articles 141, 245 and 246-Enactment of /aw-Competency of-Held: 
Legislature can enact a law, subject to its legislative competence, which will 
withdraw or fundamentally alter the very basis on which a judicial 
c 
pronouncement has proceeded and create a situation which if it had existed 
. .....,., 
earlier, the Court would not have made the pronouncement. 
Article 14-Reasonab/e classification-Validity of-Held: Legislation 
enacting a law interJding to apply to or benefit the 'well defined class'-
premises whose occupants are under threat of eviction, thus not violative of 
D Article 14-Bombay Rents, Hotel, Lodging House Rates Control, Bombay, 
Land Requisition and Bombay Government Premises (Eviction) (Amendment) 
Act, 1996. 
Doctrines: 
E 
Doctrine of colourable legislation and doctrine of Pith and Substance-
Discussed 
~ 
Paucity of accommodation and severe population and habitation 
conditions in Bombay led to enactment of Bombay Rent Restriction Act 
--> 
1939 .. This was followed by Bombay Rents, Hotel Rates and Lodging 
F Houses Rates (Control) Act, 1944. Both these acts were repealed and 
Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates (Control) Act, 1947 was 
enacted to amend and consolidate the law relating to control of rents and 
repairs of premises, rates of hotels and lodging houses, evictions and 
charges for licenses of premises etc. There was lot of pressure of 
accommodation in the State and thus, Bombay Land Requisition Act, 1948 
G was enacted to provide for requisition of land which was to continue upto 
31.3.1950. Due to shortage of accommodation requisition properties 
continued under requisition for endless period of time and also the Act 
was amended from time to time. In H.D. Vora v. The State of Maharashtra* 
this Court struck down the requisition and directed derequisitioning of 
H the flats. Thereafter the derequisitioning was upheld by this Court in 
WELFARE ASSOCN. A.R.P., MAHARASHTRA"· RANJ!T P. GOH!L 
141 
Grahak Sanstha Manch v. The State of Maharashtra case*. However by A 
virtue of interim order the aHottees in requisitioned premises continued . 
in occupation which stood
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.