Judgment

PATHAK, J. :- These are two civil appeals by special leave. The question common to these appeals is whether a lease concluded between a landlord and a tenant in contravention of Cl. 22 of the Central Provinces and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the Rent Control Order) can be assailed by the landlord as a void transaction in a proceeding between the parties to the lease?

2. Civil Appeal No. 5317 of 1983 is concerned with a shop described as Block No. 5 in a non-residential building situated in Dharampeth, Nagpur. The respondent is the landlord and the appellant is the tenant. The building was constructed before January 1, 1967, and the appellant became a tenant from October 1, 1968.

3. Clause 13 of the Rent Control Order provides that no landlord can determine a lease except with the previous written permission of the Controller, for which he must apply in writing to the Controller. Cl. 13(3)(vi) provides that if after hearing the parties the Controller is satisfied that the landlord needs the premises for himself the Controller must grant the landlord permission to determine the lease. On January 19, 1980 the respondent petitioned the Controller for permission on the ground that he required the premises occupied by the appellant as his son wanted to commence business therein.

4. It may be pointed out at this stage that Cl. 22 in Chapter III of the Rent Control Order requires :

"22(1) Every landlord of a house situate in an area to which this Chapter extends, shall -

(a) within seven days from the date of the extension of this chapter, if the house is vacant on such date; or

(b) within seven days from the date on which the landlord becomes finally aware that the house will become vacant or available for occupation by himself or for other occupation on or about a specified date;

give intimation of this fact to the Deputy Commissioner of the district in which the area is included or such other officer as may be specified by him, in the Form given in the Schedule appended to this Order, and shall not let or occupy the house except in accordance with Cl. 23.

(2) No person shall occupy any house in respect of which this chapter applies except under an order under sub-clause (1) of Cl. 23 or Cl. 24 or on an assurance from the landlord that the house is being permitted to be occupied in accordance with sub-cl. (2) of Cl. 23."

Clause 23 provides :

"23. (1) On receipt of the intimation in accordance with Cl. 22, the Deputy Commissioner may, within fifteen days from the date of receipt of the said intimation, order the landlord to let the vacant house to any person holding an office of profit under the Union or State Government or to a displaced person or to an evicted person and thereupon notwithstanding any agreement to the contrary, the landlord shall let the house to such person and place him in possession thereof immediately, if it is vacant or as soon as it becomes vacant :

Provided that, if the landlord has, in the intimation given under Cl. 22, stated that he needs the house for his own occupation, the Deputy Commissioner shall, if satisfied after due enquiry that the house is so needed, permit the landlord to occupy the same.

(2) If no order is passed and served upon the landlord within the period specified in sub-cl. (1), he shall be free to let the vacant house to any person."

Clause 30 of the Rent Control Order empowers the State Government to exempt, by Notification in the Official Gazette, any house or class of houses or any person or class of persons from all or any of the provisions of the Rent Control Order. On October 24, 1968 a Notification was issued under the said Cl. 30 exempting from all the provisions of Chapter III of the Rent Control Order any house used for a non-residential purpose if it was constructed before January 1, 1967.

5. On September 23, 1980 the respondent submitted in writing that the building comprising the premises in question had been constructed for a