Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2007 (5) TMI 609

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... desh. In the year 1947 respondent no.1 Ram Lakhan was inducted as a tenant in the shop in question on monthly rent of ₹ 40/- by the then owner. In the year 1952 the disputed shop was purchased by the appellant's mother Smt. Pyari Kunwar. After the death of his mother, appellant became owner of the property. Family of the appellant at that time was very small. Since appellant had no commercial space available he was carrying on business in a shop belonging to one Shri Jagannath which he had taken on rent. During the pendency of the case before the High Court, the appellant was evicted from the said shop and he has no other premises to carry on the business. Appellant has three sons. Apart from the disputed shop, the appellant had another small shop adjacent to it. As appellant's son Asthbujhi Prasad wanted to carry on business the said shop is being used by him. Appellant's two other sons are unemployed and one of them has completed Chartered Accountancy course. Due to non- availability of commercial space, the said son Kameshewar Prasad had to set up his office at a distance of 100 Kms. Since respondent no.1 was repeatedly committing default in payment of rent to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ned counsel for the respondent on the other hand supported the orders of the High Court and the courts below. It is to be noted that the original tenant has expired during the pendency of the proceedings before this Court and the legal heirs have been substituted in terms of this Court's 16.8.2005 passed in I.A. No.3. The question relating to relevance of subsequent events during pendency of proceedings has been examined by this Court in many cases. In Pasupuleti Venkateswarlu v. The Motor General Traders (1975 (1) SCC 770) it was observed as follows: 3. Two submissions were advanced by Sri K. S. Ramamurthy to salvage his client's case. He argued that it was illegal for the High Court to have taken cognizance of subsequent events, disastrous as they proved to be. Secondly, he urged that once the High Court held-as it did- that the appellate tribunal acted illegally in remitting the whole case to the Rent Controller, it could not go further to dismiss his whole eviction proceedings, a misfortune heavier than would have been, had he not moved the High Court at all. 4. We feel the submissions devoid of substance. First about the jurisdiction and propriety vis-a- .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e have power not only to correct error in the judgment under review but to make such disposition of the case as justice requires. And in determining what justice does require, the Court is bound to consider any change, either in fact or in law, which has supervened since the judgment was entered. and said that that view of the Court's powers was reaffirmed once again in the then recent case of Minnesota v. National Tea Co. 309 U.S. 551, 555. Sulaiman J., in the same case (AIR 1941 FC 5) relied on English cases and took the view that an appeal is by way of a re- hearing and the Court may make such order as the Judge of the first instance could have made if the case had been heard by him at the date on which the appeal was heard, (emphasis, ours). Varadachariar J., dealt with the same point a little more comprehensively. We may content ourselves with excerpting one passage which brings out the point luminously (at p. 103) : It is also on the theory of an appeal being in the nature of a re-hearing that the courts in this country have in numerous cases recognized that in moulding the relief to be granted in a case on appeal, the court of appeal is entitled to take into account e .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , the Court may take judicial notice of the event and before acting thereon put the parties on the notice of how the change in law is going to affect the rights and obligations of the parties and modify or mould the course of litigation or the relief so as to bring it in conformity with the law. In the latter case, the party relying on the subsequent event, which consists of facts not beyond pale of controversy either as to their existence or in their impact, is expected to have resort to amendment of pleadings under Order 6 Rule 17 of the CPC. Such subsequent event the Court may permit being introduced into the pleadings by way of amendment as it would be necessary to do so for the purpose of determining real questions in controversy between the parties. In Trojan Co. v. R.M.N.N. Nagappa Chettiar (AIR 1953 SC 235) this Court has held that the decision of a case cannot be based on grounds outside the pleadings of the parties and it is the case pleaded that has to be found; without the amendment of the pleading the Court would not be entitled to modify or alter the relief. In Sri Mahant Govind Rao v. Sita Ram Kesho and Ors. (1898) 25 Indian Appeals 195 (PC), their Lordships observ .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... laintiff-respondent by relying on the doctrine of eviction by title paramount as it cannot be said that the proceedings initiated by HUDA against the plaintiff-respondent have achieved a finality or are such proceeding wherein the plaintiff-respondent cannot possibly have any sustainable defence. Earlier in Ramesh Kumar v. Kesho Ram (1992 Supp. (2) SCC 623), it was held as follows: 6. The normal rule is that in any litigation the rights and obligations of the parties are adjudicated upon as they obtain at the commencement of the lis. But this is subject to an exception. Wherever subsequent events of fact or law which have a material bearing on the entitlement of the parties to relief or on aspects which bear on the moulding of the relief occur, the court is not precluded from taking a 'cautious cognizance' of the subsequent changes of fact and law to mould the relief. In Lachmeshwar Prasad Shukul v. Keshwar Lal Chaudhuri (AIR 1941 FC 5) Chief Justice Sir Maurice Gwyer observed: (AIR p.6): But with regard to the question whether the court is entitled to take into account legislative changes since the decision under appeal was given, I desire to point out that .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates