Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
G.P. SINGH, J.
Bhagwandas Tiwari
Vs.
Gaya Prasad and others
S.A. No. 504 of 1971
Decided On: 17.02.1972
(2) General Clauses Act, 1957 (MP) - S. 7 - applies to deposits made under section 13 (1) of the M. P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961.
Section 13, in so far as it is material, requires the defendant-tenant "to deposit or pay, month by month, by the 15th of each succeeding month a sum equivalent to the rent. This provision thus means that the tenant can either pay the rent to the landlord by the 15th of each succeeding month or can deposit the same in Court by the 15th of each succeeding month. The choice is left to the tenant. The requirement that the rent should be deposited in Court by the 15th of each succeeding month has to be read along with section 7 of the Madhya Pradesh General Clauses Act, 1957.
The benefit of section 7 of the M.P. General Clauses Act, 1957, applies where, by any Madhya Pradesh Act, any act or proceeding is allowed to be done or taken in Court or Office on a certain day or within a specified period. The making of a deposit in Court is an act and the prescription under section 13 of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, that the deposit should be made by the 15th of each succeeding month, is a prescription that the act of deposit should be done within a specified period. The condition for applicability of section 7 of the General Clauses Act is, therefore, satisfied. As a result, if the Court is closed on 15th, a deposit can be made on the next day on which the Court opens.
According to the Rules and Orders Chapter XXII paragraph 466, a person intending to make a deposit in Court has to make an application on which the presiding officer has to pass an order before a deposit can be accepted by the cashier. An order of the presiding officer is, therefore, necessary for making a deposit in Court. It was, therefore, not possible for the defendant to deposit the rent in Court during the vacation. [Para 2
(3) General Clauses Act, 1957 (M.P.) - S. 7 - applicability of - option also given to do the act outside the Court - section applies.
The language of section 7 cannot be limited in application only for construing those enactments in which a person who is allowed to deposit money in Court has no choice of paying the same outside the Court. Section 7 is worded in general terms and it will also apply to those enactments where the act allowed to be done in Court is not the only manner of doing it and the person concerned is also given a choice of doing a similar act outside the Court 36 MPLC 261, 1958 JLJ 130 & AIR 1938 Pat. 451 referred to. [Para 3
(4) Civil P. C., 1908 - O. 22, R. 3 & O. 6, R. 17 - legal representative - pleas allowed to be taken - amendment of plaint by legal representatives limitations.
It is well settled that the legal representatives can continue the suit on the same cause of action on which the suit was filed by the deceased plaintiff; they cannot litigate their personal rights as legal representatives. It has been held that any amendment which could not have been made at the instance of the deceased plaintiff cannot be allowed at the instance of the legal representatives. AIR 1947 Mad. 165, AIR 1924 Lah. 45 & AIR 1922 Mad. 49 relied on. [Para 4
(5) Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (MP) - 12 (1) (e) - personal requirement of the deceased plaintiff - when not available to the legal representatives.
The legal representatives were not the dependents of the deceased plaintiff. The original plaintiff pleaded a need which was strictly personal. This need vanished with the death of the plaintiff and could not be availed of by the legal representative. 1966 JLJ 190 distinguished. [Para 5
(6) Precedents - view expressed in ignorance of previous view - cannot be accepted.
When in a case view is expressed contrary to and in ignorance of the previous ruling, such view cannot be accepted. [Para 3
G.P. Singh, J.
This appeal arises out of a suit for ejectment. The suit was instituted by one Jirabai against the appellant Bhagwandas Tiwari on three grounds. The first ground was that the defendant was in arrears of rent and had not paid the arrears after notice of demand. The second ground related to the need of the plaintiff for residence. The plaintiff's case was that she was a very old, blind and feeble woman needing the help of her relatives for her daily work and, therefore, she wanted her four nephews, namely, Gaya Prasad, Rameshwar Prasad, Dwarka Prasad and Badri Prasad and their families to look after her, and as she had no sufficient accommodation in her possession for these four nephews and their families, she needed the suit accommodation. The third ground pleaded was that the house was needed for reconstruction. The defendant denied all the grounds raised in the plaint. During the pendency of the suit, the plaintiff Jirabai died and the four nephews, whose names have already been mentioned above, were substituted as legal representatives, as they were legatees under a will executed by the deceased. Some amendments were made in the plaint by the legal representatives. The trial Court decreed the suit. It was held by the trial Court that although the house could not be needed by the deceased plaintiff Jirabai, it had come in evidence that the legal representatives were living in rented accommodation and needed the house for their residence, and as they could not be compelled to live in rented accommodation when they had a house of their own, the defendant was liable to ejectment on the ground of the need of the legal representatives. It was further held that the tenant did not pay the arrears of rent on demand and did not comply with section 13 of the M. P. Accommodation Control Act. It was also held that the house was needed for reconstruction and the work of reconstruction could not be carried out without vacating the house. In the appeal filed by the defendant, the learned District Judge, Jabalpur, agreed with the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court, except on the point that the house was needed for reconstruction. It was held by the District Judge that the house was not, in fact, needed for reconstruction. Against the decree passed in appeal, the defendant has filed the present second appeal.
Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the Courts below were in error in holding that the appellant had not complied with section 13 of the Act. The facts and the reasoning on which it has been held that section 13 was not complied are that rent which ought to have been deposited on 15th May and 15th June was deposited on 17th June, and that although the Court was closed for vacation from 13th May to 16th June 1968, and the amount could not have been deposited during this period in Court, yet the default in depositing the rent on 15th May and 15th June could not be condoned though the rent was deposited on the opening day i.e. 17th June. In my opinion, the Courts below were entirely wrong in holding that the deposit of rent made on 17th June 1968 was not in accordance with section 13. Section 13, in so far as it is material, requires the defendant-tenant "to deposit or pay, month by month, by the 15th of each succeeding month a sum equivalent to the rent." This provision thus means that the tenant can either pay the rent to the landlord by the 15th of each succeeding month or can deposit the same in Court by the 15th of each succeeding month. The choice is left to the tenant. The requirement that the rent should be deposited in Court by the 15th of each succeeding month has to be read along with section 7 of the Madhya Pradesh General Clauses Act, 1957. This section reads as follows:
S. 7. Where, by any Madhya Pradesh Act, any act or proceeding is directed or allowed to be done or taken in any Court or Office on a certain day or within a specified period, then if the Court or office is closed on
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
