SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(AP) 498

Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : G.S.SINGHVI, G.YETHIRAJULU, RAMESH RANGANATHAN, G.BHAVANI PRASAD, C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
RAMVILAS BAJAJ - Appellant
Versus
ASHOK KUMAR - Respondent
Decided On : 04/30/2007
S. A. 1449 Of 2005

Advocates Appeared: A.P.Venu Gopal, A.TULSI RAJ GOKUL, ANAND KUMAR KAPOOR, Ashfaq Ahmad, BASITH ALI YAVAR, D.PRAKASH RAO, D.PRAKASH REDDY, FAZAL YOUSUFFUDIN, M.A.BASITH, M.A.RASHEED QURESHI, M.PAPA REDDY, M.RAMESH, M.Y.K.RAYUDU, NAZIR AHMED KHAN, PRATAP NARAYAN SANGHI, R.A.Achuthanand, R.CHANDRASHEKARA REDDY, SHARAD SANGHI, V.RAVINDER RAO, V.S.R.ANJANEYULU, VILAS V.AFZUL PURKAR, VINOD KUMAR

Headnote:

Constitution of India - Article 14 - Andhra pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) control Act, 1960 - Section 32 (c) - Exempted from operation - Buildings constructed – Unconstitutional - exempted buildings constructed was held unconstitutional as being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India by the Supreme Court in Motor General traders v. State of Andhra Pradesh. In order to fill up the void created by the said judgment with regard to provision for exemption of new buildings from the application of the Act, the Government in exercise of its power under section 26 of the Act issued G. O. Ms. to be applicable on and the supreme Court struck down Section 32 (b) of the Act) whereby it exempted from operation of the provisions of the Act, (a) all buildings for a period of 10 years from the date on which the construction is completed, and (b) buildings, the monthly rent of which exceeds – Held true that extending the protection of amended Section 32 (c), to cases where decrees for eviction or recovery of possession have already been passed and appeals/ revisions are pending there against, would inevitably result in all pending actions, in which landlords have applied for possession of their buildings let out to tenants, being set at naught on the ground that the civil court lacks inherent jurisdiction to try the suits or entertain petitions for execution of decrees. In this context it is well to remember yet another rule of construction that, when the words of the statute are clear, plain and unambiguous, Courts are bound to give effect to that meaning, irrespective of the consequences - (43 supra) - with effect, when the amended Section 32 (c) came into force, persons, by whom rent payable for a building does not exceed rs. 3,500/- p. m. within Municipal corporations of the State and does not exceed in other areas, would come within the definition of "tenant" under section 2 (ix) of Act 15 of 1960 - (ii) even if such persons have suffered a decree for eviction prior thereto, they are entitled for the protection of act 15 of 1960 provided they continue in possession of the building - (iii) after, such tenants cannot be evicted in execution of a decree in view of the protection conferred on them by Section 10 (1) of Act 15 of 1960 - after the amended Section 32 (c) came into force, with effect civil court must be held to have become coram non- judice, not to have jurisdiction to pass a decree of eviction in respect of buildings the rent of which in areas within Municipal Corporations of the state does not exceed - (v) even if at the time of institution of the suit or when a decree for eviction was passed, the amended section 32 (c) was not in force, but was introduced during the pendency of the appeal a tenant, who continues to remain in possession of a building whose rent is below the limits prescribed in the amended section 32 (c), for being exempted from the provisions of the Act, is entitled for the protection of Act 15 of 1960, more particularly section 10 (1) thereof, and the appellate Court is divested of its jurisdiction to pass a decree of eviction.

C. V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J.

( 1 ) (PER Honble Justice C. V. Nagarjuna reddy) on behalf of the Honble the chief Justice and the Honble dr. Justice G. Yethirajulu, the Honble justice G. Bhavani Prasad and himself. Issue under reference: whether Section 32 (c) of the Andhra pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) control Act, 1960 (for short, the Act) as brought into force by Section 3 of the Andhra pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) control (Amendment) Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the Amendment Act) has effect on the cases pending on the date of its coming into force is the question referred for the consideration of the Larger Bench. The Background Facts:

( 2 ) SECTION 32 (b) of the Act, which exempted buildings constructed on or after 26-8-1957, was held unconstitutional as being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of india by the Supreme Court in Motor General traders v. State of Andhra Pradesh. In order to fill up the void created by the said judgment with regard to provision for exemption of new buildings from the application of the Act, the Government of andhra Pradesh in exercise of its power under section 26 of the Act issued G. O. Ms. No. 636 dated 29-12-1983, to be applicable on and from 26-10-1983 (the date on which the supreme Court struck down Section 32 (b) of the Act) whereby it exempted from operation of the provisions of the Act, (a) all buildings for a period of 10 years from the date on which the construction is completed, and (b) buildings, the monthly rent of which exceeds Rs. 1,000/ -.

( 3 ) WHILE the said G. O. was in force, the respondents in all these cases (hereinafter referred to as the landlords) filed suits for recovery of the respective demised premises. In all the cases, the monthly rent of the premises was above Rs. 1,000/- and the same fell within the exemption clause provided under G. O. Ms. 636 dated 29-12-1983. Some of the suits were decreed and directions for eviction of the tenants were issued, while other suits were pending on the date of enforcement of the Amendment Act. e. 28-5-2005. For the sake of convenience, the provisions of Section 32 of the Act as it stood prior to 26-10-1983, G. O. Ms. No. 636 dated 29-12-1983, which provided for exemption in place of Section 32 (b) consequent on its striking down and section 32 as introduced by the amendment act; are reproduced below. Section 32 prior to 26-10-1983 g. O. Ms. No. 636, dated 29-12-83 (Exemption from operation of the provisions of the Act) section 32 as amended by the Amendment Act 2005

32. Act not to apply to certain buildings:- the provision of this Act shall not apply-(a) to any building owned by the Government; (b) to any building constructed on or after the 26th August, 1957. (a) All buildings for a period of ten years from the date on which their construction is completed and; (b) Buildings the monthly rent of which exceeds rupees one thousand. 32. Act not apply to certain buildings:- the provisions of this Act shall not apply ,- (a) to any building belonging to the State Government or the Central Government, or Cantonment Board or any local authority; (b) to any building constructed or substantially renovated, either before or after the commencement of this Act for a period of fifteen years from the date of completion of such construction or substantial renovation. Explanation I:- A building may be said to be substantially renovated if not less than seventy five percent of the premises is built new in accordance with the criteria prescribed for determining the extent of renovation; explanation II:- Date of completion of construction shall be the date of completion as intimated to the concerned authority or of assessment of property tax, whichever is earlier, and where the section 32 prior to 26-10-1983 g. O. Ms. No. 636, dated 29-12-83 (Exemption from operation of the provisions of the Act) section 32 as amended by the Amendment Act 2005 premises have been constructed in stages the date on which































































































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top