( 43 ) IN Brij Raj Krishna v. Shaw and Brothers, A. I. R. 1951 S. C. 115, the non obtante clause appearing in lection 11 (1) (a) of the relevant Act was "notwithstanding anything contained in any agreement or law to the contrary". Their Lordships held that the act confers on Controller complete powers to decide all questions arising under the Rent Act in view of the scheme of the Act. It was ip reference to this clause specifically observed. "section 11 begins with the words "notwithstanding etc. " and hence any attempt to import the provisions relating to the law of transfer of Property for the interpretation of the Section would seem to be out of place: Section 11 is a self contained section and it is wholly unnecessary to go outside the Act for determining whether a tenant is liable to be evicted or not, and under what conditions he can be evicted. It clearly provides that a tenant is not liable to be evicted except on certain conditions. "

( 44 ) IN Aswini Kumar v. Arabinda Bose, A. I R 1952 S C 369, the non obstante clause in section 2 was as follows:"notwithstanding anything contained in the Indian Bar Council act. . . . . . or in any other law". Their Lordships said that it s

Click Here to Read the rest of this document