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

1996 Supreme(Ker) 352

Judges : T.V.RAMAKRISHNAN,J.B.KOSHY
Suhara - Appellant
Versus
Abdul Shukkur - Respondent
Case No : CRP No. 1103 of 1996
Decided On : 10/10/1996
Advocates Appeared :
A.K. Chinnan For Petitioner P.C. Joseph For Respondents

The main legal point established in the judgment is that the right to claim eviction under S.11(2)(b) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act based on arrears of rent payable to the transferor cannot be transferred along with the building but must be specifically assigned, and a mere right to sue for eviction cannot be transferred.

Headnote:

eviction - assignment of arrears of rent - Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act - S.11(2)(b) - S.109 of the Transfer of Property Act - Ext. Al - Ext. A2 - right to recover arrears of rent - right to sue - eviction under S.11(2)(b)

Fact of the Case:

The case involved a dispute over whether a petition for eviction under S.11(2)(b) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act could be filed by an assignee landlord alleging arrears of rent that fell due prior to the assignment of the building in his favor.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the assignee landlord could not claim eviction under S.11(2)(b) of the Act based on arrears of rent payable to the transferor, as the right to recover such arrears of rent was not transferred along with the building but was transferred separately by Ext. A2. The court set aside the judgment of the Appellate Authority and restored the order of the Rent Control Court.

Issues: The key issues involved the interpretation of S.11(2)(b) of the Act, the applicability of S.109 of the Transfer of Property Act, the validity of Ext. A2, and the rights of the assignee landlord to claim eviction based on arrears of rent.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the assignee landlord could not claim eviction under S.11(2)(b) of the Act based on arrears of rent payable to the transferor, as the right to recover such arrears of rent was not transferred along with the building but was transferred separately by Ext. A2. The court also considered the proviso to S.109 of the Transfer of Property Act and the principle that a mere right to sue for eviction cannot be transferred.

Final Decision: The Civil Revision Petition was allowed, and the judgment of the Appellate Authority was set aside, with the order of the Rent Control Court being restored. No costs were awarded in the circumstances of the case.

Judgment :-

Koshy, J.

The short question to be decided in this revision petition is whether a petition for eviction under S.11(2) (b) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act (for short 'the act) can be filed by an assignee landlord alleging existence of arrears of rent which fell due prior to the assignment of the building in his favour even if the right to recover such prior arrears of rent was later assigned to him by a separate assignment deed? The present landlord got the property by Ext. Al dated 17.11.1989. It is the case of the petitioners that the tenant/revision petitioner was in arrears of rent from 1.1.1979 till the date of transfer.

By Ext. A2 dated 30.12.1989 the right to recover an amount of Rs. 3,000/- as arrears of rent and interest was also transferred by the erstwhile landlord to the present landlord. Thereafter, the present landlord filed Rent Control Petition under S.11(2) of the Act. It was found by the Rent Control Court that under Ext. Al the present landlord has got the right to recover future rent alone from the date of transfer. By Ext. A2, he obtained the right to recover arrears of rent. But, that will not enable him to maintain an

application under S.11(2) of the Act 2 of 1995. By virtue of Ext. A2, what the present landlord received is only the right to recover previous arrears of rent and that can be recovered by filing a civil suit and petition under S.11(2) of the Act is not maintainable. The Appellate Authority found that under S.2(3) of the Act landlord includes a person who is entitled to receive rent of a building. In view of the assignment in his favour the present landlord is entitled to receive the rent. Therefore, he can maintain a petition under S.11(2)(b) of the Act. It was also found that since the property itself was assigned by Ext. Al, the right to collect arrears of rent has also been assigned by Ext. Al itself. Therefore, the present landlord can maintain an application under S.11(2)(b) for evicting the tenant for arrears of rent as rent was not paid for 1979 to 1989. The Appellate Authority remanded the matter to the trial court. The order of the Appellate Authority is challenged in this revision petition.

2. The property was transferred to the present landlord by Ext. P1. In Ext. Al no specific mention is made regarding arrears of rent. S.109 of the Transfer of Property Act reads as follows:

"If the lessor transfers the property leased, or any part thereof, or any part of his interest therein, the transferee, in the absence of a contract to the contrary, shall possess all the rights, and, if the lessee so elects, be subject to all the liabilities of the lessor as to the property or part transferred so long as he is the owner of it; but the lessor shall not, by reason only of such transfer, cease to be subject to any of the liabilities imposed upon him by the lease, unless the lessee elects to treat the transferee as the person liable to him:

Provided that the transferee is not entitled to arrears of rent due before the transfer, and that, if the lessee, not having reason to believe that such transfer has been made, pays rent to the lessor, the lessee shall not be liable to pay such rent over again to the transferee.

The lessor, the transferee and the lessee may determine what proportion of the premium or rent reserved by the lease is payable in respect of the part so transferred, and, in case they disagree, such determination may be made by any court having jurisdiction to entertain a suit for the possession of the property leased."

In view of the proviso to the above section the transferee landlord is not entitled to arrears of rent due before the assignment. By Ext. A2, the previous landlord has transferred his right to collect an amount of Rs. 2,640/- as arrears of rent from January 1979 onwards to the date of transfer and Rs. 360/- as interest thereof. In view of Ext. A2, the maximum the assignee landlord received was the right to recover a quantified amount or debt m










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