The expression "the means" as used in clause (a) of Sub Section (4) of Section 19 of the Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1956, can generally speaking be equated with the resources at the disposal of a tenant or what he is getting or can fairly be assumed likely to get irrespective of their source.

( 1 ) DURING hearing of petition U/art. 227 of the Constitution following question was referred to a D. B. by Single Judge :-

"whether the income or earning capacity of tenant alone should be taken into consideration by competent authority in proceedings U/s 19 of Slum Areas (Iandc) Act, 1956 or whether income of persons living with the tenant as members of his family can also be taken into consideration.

( 2 ) COMPETENT Authority granted permission to execute order of eviction obtained before the coming into force of the Act. (In para 3, Section 19 is reproduced.)

( 4 ) THUS in granting or refusing to grant the permission under Sub Section (3) one of the factors to be taken into account by the Competent Authority is whether alternative accommodation within the means of the tenant would be available to him if he were evicted.

( 5 ) IT appears that the interpretation of the expression "the means" as appearing in clause (a) of Sub section (4) of Section 19, has not been uniform. In Krishan Lal Vs. Smt. Ramo Devi and another (1972 R. L. R. (N) 162-D L. T 509, Safeer. , J. , quashed an order of the competent Authority by holding that it had been in disregard of the requirements of section 19 of the Act. That case was in respct of a shop in occupation of one Kishan 1 as a tenant. The competent Authority found that Krishan Lal was also working with his father Kahan Chand in another shop and that the work carried on in the two shops was of different kinds. It was held that the competent authority could not take into consideration the means of the father while determining the means of the tenant to find alternative accomodation as the father was not a co-tenant with the tenant in respect of the shop regarding which eviction proceedings were intended to be instituted.

( 6 ) RANGARAJAN J. in Shri Kirath Chand Vs. Shri P. R. Varshneya and others (I. L. R. 1971 Delhi 405) took the view that the Income of the daughter-in-law "could not" be taken into consideration as the Income of the tenant, especially in the absence of any material to suggest that the return got by her was as the result of any investment made by her husband or father-in-law. Deshpande J in Said ud-din Vs. Mahabir Singh A. I. R. 1971 Delhi 210 did not go into the question. whether the Income of the family members could be taken into. consideration in determing the means of the tenant as it was found that the tenant who had no income of his own but whose family of 3 members had an income of Rs. 725. 00 per month would not be able to find alternative accommodation within that income if evicted. In another case Mani Ram Vs. Ram Lal (C. W. (Main No 41 of 1971 decided on 22. 7. 1971), the same learned Judge took the view that where a tenant was living as a member of a joint family along with his well-to-do sons and if there was nothing to show that the tenant would have to pay alone to find alternative accommodation then in those circumstences it could not be said that the tenant was not in possession, of sufficient means to find alternative accommodation if evicted. T. V. R. Tatachari, J. in Om Parkash Vs. Lachhman Dass (1972 D. L. T. 382) observed that the means of the tenant is a material factor to be taken into consideration under Section 19 (4) of the Act and it could not be assumed that a house belonging to the mother of a tenant would be available to the tenant for joint accommodation.

( 7 ) THERE cannot be any doubt that under clause (a) of Sub. S. (4) of S 19 of the Act the means of the tenant have to be taken into consideration in determining whether alternative accommodation would be available to him if he were evicted. The word "means". is however, wider in. its scope, than the word "income" In the Oxford English Dictionary Volume VI-1933 edition at page 270 the word "means" has been defined as "the resources" at (one s) disposal for effecting some object, chiefly (of a person s) pecuniary resources viewed with regard to their degree of adequacy to (