Back
High Court Of Delhi
HAJI MOHAMMED DIN - Appellant
Versus
NARAIN DASS - Respondent
Regular Second Appeal 44 of 1973
Decided On : 11/06/1978
TENANT - Definition - Retrospective amendment - Effect - Heritability of tenancy rights - Limited right of inheritance granted to some of the heirs living in the premises with the deceased person whose tenancy has been determined - Amendment applies only in respect of residential premises.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants before us are heirs of tenants of premises let out for non-residential purposes. The tenancies have been held to have been terminated before the deaths of the tenants which took place prior to 1-12-1975. The heirs of the deceased tenaats could not, therefore, be said to be living in the premises with the deceased at the time of their deaths. The decrees for possession have been passed against the heirs in suits instituted in civil courts on the ground that the heirs (appellants herein) were not tenants and the Delhi Rent Control Act did not apply to them.
Finding of the Court:
The retrospective amendment also inserted a distinction between the letting of premises for residential purposes and the letting of premises for non-residential purposes in the definition of "tenant" in section 2 (1) of the Delhi Act. The limited right of inheritance is granted only to some of the heirs living in the premises with the deceased person whose tenancy has been determined but not to those who could not be living with him because the letting was for a non-residential purpose.
Issues: 1. What is the meaning of "tenant" in section 2 (1) of the principal Act firstly under the old definition as it existed prior to 1st December, 1975 and secondly in the amended definition with effect from 1st December, 1975 ? 2. Does the decision of the Supreme Court in Damadilal and others v. Parashram and others, AIR 1976 S. C. 2229 (1), apply to the construction of the old definition of "tenant" in preference to the majority decision in Anand Nivas Pvt. Ltd. v. Anandji Kalyanji Pedhi and others, AIR 1965 SC 4 14 (2), followed in J. C. Chatterjee and others, v. Shri Sri Kishan Tandon and others, AIR 1972 S. C. 2526 (3) ? 3. Whether in the new definition clauses (ii) and (iii) of section 2 (1) have to be considered together or whether clause (ii) thereof can be construed independently of clause (iii) and without being fettered by it ?
Ratio Decidendi: The ratio decidendi of a case is ascertained mainly by two methods. Firstly it is determined by ascertaining the facts treated as material by the court and the principle derived from the application of law to these facts (A. L. Goodhart, "determining the ratio decidendi of a case") Essays in Jurisprudence and the Common Law page 1. Secondly, the ratio of a decision as lawyers understand it may be said to be the rule of law expressly or impliedly treated by the Judge as a necessary step in reaching his conclusion (Rupert Cross, "precedent in English Law", 2nd Edition page 77 ).
Final Decision: The answer to the reference is that after the death of the person continuing in possession after the determination of his tenancy, the legal representatives had the limited right of inheritance as given in the definition of "tenant" in section 2 (1) as retrospectively amended by the amending Act of 1976. Rights of these legal representatives have to be determined in the light of the observations made by this Bench above. The appeals may now go back to the referring Bench for further disposal.
( 1 ) IT is the effect of the change in the definition of "tenant" in section 2 (1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (the principal Act) brought about by the retrospective amendment made by section 2 of the Delhi Rent Control (Amendment) Act, 1976 (amending Act), which is to be considered in these appeals referred to the Full Bench.
( 2 ) THE Questions (1) What is the meaning of "tenant" in section 2 (1) of the principal Act firstly under the old definition as it existed prior to 1st December, 1975 and secondly in the amended definition with effect from 1st December, 1975 ? (2) Does the decision of the Supreme Court in Damadilal and others v. Parashram and others, AIR 1976 S. C. 2229 (1), apply to the construction of the old definition of "tenant" in preference to the majority decision in Anand Nivas Pvt. Ltd. v. Anandji Kalyanji Pedhi and others, AIR 1965 SC 4 14 (2), followed in J. C. Chatterjee and others, v. Shri Sri Kishan Tandon and others, AIR 1972 S. C. 2526 (3) ? (3) Whether in the new definition clauses (ii) and (iii) of section 2 (1) have to be considered together or whether clause (ii) thereof can be construed independently of clause (iii) and without being fettered by it ?
( 3 ) THE Change (a) Old Definition: The original definition of "tenant" in section 2 (1) in the principal Act was as follows : , tenant means any person by whom or on whose account or behalf the rent of any premises is, or but for a special contract would be, payable and includes a sub-tenant and also any person continuing in possession after the termination of his tenancy but shall not include any person against whom any order or decree for eviction has been passed. "
( 4 ) (B) Its Interpretation In Anand Nivas followed in J. C. Chatterjee the words "any person continuing in possession after the termination of his tenancy" were construed to mean a statutory tenant who was sharply distinguished from the contractual tenant. It was held that the possession of the statutory tenant was protected only during his life time by the rent control legislation. His legal representatives were not entitled to inherit either the tenancy or the statutory protection after his death. This was contrasted with the possession of contractual tenant whose tenancy was heritable after his death and whose legal representatives were also entitled to the protection of the rent control legislation.
( 5 ) (C) Hardship : Parliament was of the view that the total absence of heritability of tenancy rights or statutory protection against eviction caused hardship to the legal representatives of a person who continued in possession after the termination of his tenancy. This hardship was redressed by Parliament by meeting the grievances of the legal representatives half way. A compromise was made between the claims of the landlords for immediate possession of the premises on the date of the so-called statutory tenant and the claims of his legal representatives to inherit his statutory protection. The Delhi Rent Control (Amendment) Ordinance No. 24 of 1975 came into force on 1st December, 1975. It was replaced by the amending Act of 1976 which also was made to come into force on 1st December, 1975.
( 6 ) (D) The New Definition : The amendment replaced the old definition by recasting section 2 (1), the relevant part of which is as follows : tenant means any person by whom or on whose account or behalf the rent of any premises is, or, but for a special contract, would be payable, and includes (i) a sub-tenant; (ii) any person continuing in possession after the. termination of his tenancy: and (iii) in the event of the death of the person continuing in possession after the termination of his tenancy, subject to the order of succession and conditions, specified, respectively, in Explanation I and Explanation II to this clause, such of the aforesaid persons (a) spouse, (b) son or daughter, or, where there arc both son and daughter both of them, (c) parents, (d) daught
AI
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
