LexZENOBIA BHANOT versus P.K. VASUDEVA AND ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
- .. - ZENOBIA BHANOT A v. P.K. VASUDEVA AND ANR. NOVEMBER 14, 1995 B [KULDIP SINGH AND K.S. PARIPOORNAN, JJ.) East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 as amended by Act No . 2 of 1985-Section 13A-Scope of-Right given to a 'Specified Landlord' to recover immediate possession of residential building-Residential building let C out in parts-Landlord is given option to recover possession of such building or any part or pwts of building-Parts so let out from part of building it- self-Second proviso to Section 13A cannot be construed as nullifying main provision of Section. The appellant's husband, an IAS Officer who was working as Com- D missioner in the Government of Haryana, retired in the year 1975 and died in 1985, owned a building in Chandigarh. The building was let out in four portions to four separate tenants. The appellant, widow of deceased, a 'specified landlord' filed four applications u/s 13A of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, as amended by Act No. 2of1985, against the four tenants. The applications came up before three different Rent Controllers. Eviction was ordered. The tenants filed revisions assailing the order of ejectment passed against them. The High Ccurt held that under the second proviso to section 13A, the landlord is entitled to recover possession of only one residential building-one part. The landlord exer- cised the option by choosing the portion of the building. The applications filed against the other two tenants were dismissed by the .Rent Controller as infructuous in view of the decision of the High Court. The revision filed against the order were dismissed by the Division Bench of the High Court which approved the interpretation placed on the second proviso to section E F 13A of the Act by earlier decisions of Single Judges. The Division Bench held that if a residential or a scheduled building is let out in parts, each G part will become a scheduled building enabling the specified landlord to avail the concession only from a part and the question whether accom- modation with the landlord after taking possession from one of the tenant is sufficient for his personal requirement or not is not to be gone into in such proceedings. The appeals had been filed against the judgment of the H 207 208 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995) SUPP. 5 S.C.R. A Division Bench of the High Court. ·B c The appellant submitted that the interpretation placed on section 13A by the High Court was erroneous and failed to give effect to the concluding words in the opening clause of Section 13A; that Section 13A was a special provision enacted to give relief to 'specified landlord' to recover immediate possession of his residential or scheduled building; that Section 13A gives right to the 'specified landlord', who does not own or possess any other suitable accommodation for his own occupation, a right to recover immediately the possession of his residential building and if such residential building is let out in part or parts, the landlord has the right or option to recover immediately the possession of the building itself inclusive of any part or parts of such building; that it was a clear error to conclude that each part will become a scheduled building or a residential building restricting the right of the 'specified landlord' to avail the conces- sion 'only from a part'. D The respondents submitted that the interpretation placed in the E decision under appeal, were warranted by the terms of Section 13A of the Act. Allowing the appeals, this Court HELD : The title to Section 13A of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 as amended by Act No. 2 of 1985, states that the right is given to a.'specified landlord' to recover immediate possession of residen- tial or scheduled building. The statement of objects and reasons also states that the summary procedure for eviction of tenants from the residential and F scheduled buildings is provided in Section 13A at any time within one year ........ applied to the Rent Controller .......... to recover possession of his residential building for his own occupation .•.......... , there shall. accrue, .......... to such specified landlord, .......... a right to recover immediately the possession of such residential building ......... or any part or parts of such building, if it is let out in part or parts. The provision of the statute are G clear. The right is given to a 'specified lan
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.