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

1962 (1) TMI 71

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ion Urban Rent Restriction ordinance, 2006 BK (No. VIII of 2006 BK). The grounds urged by the landlord were (a) non-payment of rent by the tenants, (b) non payment of house tax by the tenants and (c) that the shops were in a state of great disrepair and were dilapidated, and the landlord wished to rebuild them after dismantling the structures. The landlord averred that he had obtained sanction of the Municipal Committee to a proposed plan of construction, and accumulated some building material before making the application. The tenants resisted the application. The Rent Controller framed issues relating to the three grounds; but the first two have ceased to be material now. On the issue relating to the third ground, the Rent Controller h .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nd five children. The Rent Controller, therefore, held that he had no means to rebuild the premises. The Rent Controller did not feel impressed by the alleged purchase of 40 bags of cement, because a greater part of the cement was used up already in building two or three latrines, and the quantity left was wholly insufficient for the proposed building. He, therefore, decided the issue against the landlord. On appeal, these findings were confirmed by the appellate authority, who held that the shops and chobaras were in good condition, and that the landlord was not, in good faith, wanting to replace the building, when he had no means to built it. Against the order of the appellate authority, an application for revision purporting to be und .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ctment is whether the landlord genuinely wants to rebuild the premises, and further, that the actual condition of the premises is a wholly irrelevant factor . In dealing with the merits of the case, the learned Judge referred to the offer of the landlord to put back the tenants in possession, if the premises were not demolished within a month of his obtaining possession thereof, and concluded, without discussing the evidence, as follows: Upon the evidence on record it seems to me established beyond all doubt that the landlord genuinely and bona fide requires these premises for rebuilding. He, therefore, set aside the concurrent orders of the two Tribunals, and ordered the eviction of the tenants, giving them two month s time in whi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ting portions which are irrelevant here, reads as follows: 13. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, a tenant in possession of a building or rented land shall not be evicted therefrom in execution of a decree passed before or after the commencement of this ordinance or otherwise and whether before or after the termination of the tenancy, except in accordance with the provisions of this section. X X X (3) (a) A landlord may apply to the Controller for an order directing the tenant to put the landlord in possession. X X X (iii)i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ack in possession. Clause (b) clearly shows both affirmatively and negatively that the landlord must satisfy the Controller about his claim, before he can obtain an order in his favour. The Controller has to be satisfied about the genuineness of the claim. To reach this conclusion, obviously the Controller must be satisfied about the reality of the claim made by the landlord, and this can only be established by looking at all the surrounding circumstances, such as the condition of the building, its situation, the possibility of its being put to a more profitable use after construction, the means of the landlord and so on. It is not enough that the landlord comes forward, and says that he entertains a particular intention, however strongly, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t the building was in a good state and did not need to be pulled down or reconstructed. With such clear findings, one would expect that a revising Court, however vide its powers may be, would, at least, go into the question over again, if it was going to depart from this unanimous conclusion. It is hardly necessary to go into the question of the extent of the powers of the High Court under s. 15(5) of the Rent Restriction Act. They have been adverted to in the ruling of this Court, above mentioned. They do not, however, include the power to reverse concurrent findings, without showing how those findings are erroneous. In the present case, the learned Judge has given his conclusion without adverting to single piece of evidence, from which hi .....

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