Judgment

HEGDE, J.: The question of law that arises for decision in this appeal by special leave is not free from difficulty. That question is, whether a decree for eviction obtained in a suit instituted after obtaining the permission of the Commissioner under sub-section (3) of Section 3 of the U. P. (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act, 1947 (to be hereinafter referred to as the Act) becomes unenforceable if the State Government acting under Section 7-F of that Act revokes the permission granted by the Commissioner after the decree is passed?

2. The appellant was a tenant of the respondent in respect of a shop in Baluganj in Agra. On January 2, 1959, the respondent applied to the District Magistrate under Section 3 (1) of the Act for permission to institute a suit against the appellant for evicting him from the shop in question. That application was rejected by the District Magistrate as per his order of July 9, 1959. The respondent took up the matter in revision to the Commissioner under sub-section (2) of Section 3. The Commissioner reversed the order of the District Magistrate and granted the permission asked for on October 16, 1959. As against that order the appellant moved the State Government under Section 7-F on November 17, 1959. On January 1, 1960, the respondent served on the appellant a notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. The appellant replied to that notice on January 6, 1960. In that reply he informed the respondent that he had already moved the State Government to revoke the permission granted by the Commissioner. On February 13, 1960 the respondent instituted suit No. 115 of 1960 in the Court of Munsiff, Agra seeking for the eviction of the appellant from the suit premises. The appellant filed his written statement in that case on May 7, 1960. Therein again he took the plea that the permission granted by the Commissioner is not final as he had moved the Government to revoke the same. The suit was decreed by the learned Munsif on November 2, 1960. The appellants went up in appeal as against that order to the Civil Judge, Agra. On January 27, 1961, the State Government revoked the permission granted by the Commissioner during the pendency of the appeal. Relying on this order the Civil Judge of Agra allowed the appeal of the appellant on February 9, 1961. As against that decision the respondent went up in second appeal to the High Court. The High Court allowed the second appeal on 19th March, 1968 following the Full Bench decision of that Court in Bashi Ram v. Mantri Lal, ILR (1965) 1 All 545 (FB). This appeal is directed against that decision.

3. The Act was intended as a temporary measure as could be gathered from its title as well as the preamble. It is deemed to have come into force on the 1st day of October 1946 though it was passed in 1947. Under the Act as originally stood, the decision of the District Magistrate under Section 3 was neither appealable nor revisable. As per the amendments effected in 1952 a limited power of revision was conferred on the Commissioner. By the Amending Act 17 of 1954, the power conferred on the Commissioner was enlarged and Section 7-F was incorporated in the Act which says that:

"the State Government may call for the records of any case granting or refusing to grant permission for the filing of a suit for eviction referred to in Section 3 ..........and make such order as appears to it necessary for the ends of justice."

The only sections in the Act material for the purpose of this appeal are Sections 3 and 7-F. Section 3 reads thus:

"Restrictions on evictions.-Subject to any order passed, under sub-section (3), no suit shall, without the permission of the District Magistrate, be filed in any civil court against a tenant for his eviction from any accommodation, except on one or more of the following grounds:

(a) that the tenant is in arrears of rent for more than three months and has failed to pay the same to the landlord within one month of the service