Validity of the provisions of Sections held unconstitutional.

The appeal and the civil revision petition arise out of a suit in ejectment filed by the plaintiff in O.S. No. 51 of 1958 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Tanjore in respect of a vacant site lying within the municipal limits of Tanjore town and comprised in town Survey No. 2862.

The plaintiff was admittedly the owner of the property but the defendant resisted the suit claiming benefits under the Madras City Tenants Protection Act III of 1922. This Act was extended to the municipal town of Tanjore by notification of the State Government dated 28th March, 1956 in exercise of its powers under Madras Act XIX of 1955 amending Madras Act III of 1922. The defendant filed in the Court below two applications, I.A. No. 637 of 1958 and O.P. No. 6 of 1959 under section 9 of the Act for fixing the price of the suit site and for directing the plaintiff to convey the site to him on payment of the price that may be fixed by the Court. The plaintiff disputed the defendant’s right to obtain the benefit of the Act contending that the defendant was not a tenant, that the defendant was estopped by his conduct from asserting any right under the Act and that the defendant having pleaded a fresh tenancy between himself and the plaintiff after the date of the notification extending the Act to the Tanjore Town was disentitled to any relief under the Act.

The learned Subordinate Judge of Tanjore found that the defendant was a tenant entitled to the benefits of the Act, and the suit was not maintainable as the requisite notice under the terms of section 11 of the Act was not given by the plaintiff. He accordingly dismissed the suit. The learned Subordinate Judge fixed the market value of the suit site as Rs. 12,000 and gave relief to the defendant under the Act whereby the plaintiff was compelled to receive the sum of Rs. 12,000 and to convey the suit site to the defendant. The plantiff has preferred the above appeal against the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge non-suiting him and has preferred the civil revision petition against the order directing him to convey the property for Rs. 12,000 in O.P. No. 6 of 1959.

During the pendency of the above proceedings in this Court the Madras City Tenants Protection Act (Madras Act III of 1922) was amended by the Madras Act XIII of 1960. This amending Act was published in Part IV, section 4 of the Fort St. George Gazette, dated 27th July, 1960. The suit site was leased out for non-residential purposes by the predecessors-in-interest of the plaintiff to the defendant. Madras Act XIII of 1960 has now confined the operation of the parent Act, Madras Act III of 1922 only to residential buildings in the Tanjore Municipal Town. The amending Act has also been made expressly retrospective in operation by section 9 of the Act. The effect of this legislation is to govern the present proceedings in this Court and to disentitle the defendant from claiming any relief under the Madras City Tenants Protection Act. The learned counsel for the respondent challenged the relevant provisions under Madras Act XIII of 1960 affecting the rights of the respondents as being obnoxious to the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India, and hence unconstitutional. We issued notice to the State Government as the vires of a legislative enactment was called in question. The State of Madras filed C.M.P. No. 210 of 1961 in this Gout for being impleaded as a. respondent in the appeal. This application was granted by order of this Court dated 10th January, 1961. We have heard the learned Advocate-General on behalf of the State Government on the constitutional issue raised on behalf of the defendant respondent.

The suit property originally belonged to a Trust called Sri Rama Vilas Dharmam alias Sengammal Bai Trust. This trust was administered by two women, Kaveri Bai and Gopi Bai. On 23rd April, 1945 the trustees leased out the property to one Venugopala Chettiar under Exhibit B-1, which is