Requirement of premises for carrying on business by her husband if a ground for eviction.

The petitioner before me is the landlady. This petition arises under the Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960. The petitioner filed an application for possession of her premises on the ground that the same was required for the business carried on by her husband. The respondent-tenant contended originally that he was not the tenant, that the requirement of the petitioner was not bonafide and that in any event the application was not maintainable as the premises was only required by the landlady’s husband. In the appeal before the Court of Small Causes, the relationship of landlord and tenant was not canvassed. Both the Rent Controller and the Court of Small Causes held that the petitioner required the premises bonafide for use and occupation. The Rent Controller however held, on the question of maintainability, that the petition was maintainable by the landlady though the premises was required by her husband. But, on this question, the learned Chief Judge of the Court of Small Causes differed and held that the requirement by the landlady’s husband of the premises belonging to the landlady will not be a ground for eviction under section 10 (3) (a) (iii) of Act XVIII of 1960. He, therefore, dismissed the petition as being not maintainable. This revision petition is directed against the said order of the learned Chief Judge of the Court of Small Causes.

The Rent Controller came to the conclusion that the petitioner is entitled to maintain her application as she is the landlady and that the word "landlady" or "landlord" in section 10 (3) (a) (iii) would include a dependant or a near relative. The appellate Court however held with some hesitancy that the words "landlord or his son" appearing in the new Act is likely to indicate that the requirement must be for the use of the landlord or his son and for the use of no other person. The main question for determination is whether the Amending Act XVIII of 1960 has in fact made any deliberate change in the law as it existed before. Section 10 (3) (a) (iii) of Act XVIII of 1960 reads as follows:-

"10 (3) (a). A landlord may, subject to the provisions of clause (d) apply to the Controller for an order directing the tenant to put the landlord in possession of the building-

******

(iii) in case it is any other non-residential building, if the landlord or his son is not occupying for purposes of a business which he or his son is carrying on, a non-residential building in the city, town or village concerned Which is his own."

Section 7 (3) (a) (iii) of the Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1949 (XXV of 1949) reads as follows:-

"7(3) (a). A landlord may, subject to the provisions of clause (d), apply to the Controller for an order directing the tenant to put the landlord in possession of the building-

******

(iii) in case it is any other non-residential building if the landlord is not occupying for purposes of a business which he is carrying on, a non-residential building in the city, town or village concerned Which is his own or to the possession of which he is entitled whether under this Act or otherwise."

The only conspicuous change effected in the provision under consideration is, what was ‘landlord ‘in section 7 (3) (a) (iii) in Act XXV of 1949 has been changed to " landlord or his son " in Act XVIII of 1960. Of course, the latter portion of section 7 (3) (a) (iii) of Act XXV of 1949 has been omitted and the omission is not relevant for purposes of this case.

What exactly the word ‘landlord’ in the old Act connoted was the subject-matter of two decisions of our High Court. In Kolandaivelu Chettiar v. Koolavana Chettiar1, Venkatadri, J., held that the word ‘landlord’ cannot be intended or treated as rigid, but elastic. The learned Judge held that the word would include a dependant as well. This decision was rendered after the passing of the new Act XVIII of 1960. Under section 35 of the new Act, the earlier Act XXV of 1949, was repealed and the statute obligat