IMPORTANT POINTS
After enactment of Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 repealing 1947 Act and Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Laws (Amendment and Validation) Act, 2014, all proceedings leading to decree of eviction against NTC became without jurisdiction and the undertaking given by NTC to vacate the suit property became unenforceable.
Respondents given liberty to challenge validity of Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Laws (Amendment and Validation) Act, 2014 and if successful, to file contempt petition.

Headnote:(a) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Section 114 of the Section 114 – Review – Any person considering himself aggrieved can file review petition – By operation of 1983 Act and section 3 of 1995 Act statutory tenancy rights in relation to the suit property stood transferred to and vested absolutely in the Central Government and in turn stood transferred to and vested in the National Textile Corporation – Held, Union of India having locus to file review petition. (Para 19, 20, 21)
       (b) Constitution of India – Article 137 and 142 r/w Order XLVII, Rule 1, Supreme Court Rules – Supreme Court can review its judgment/order if petition is on ground(s) specified in Rule 1 – Instantly union of India filed review petition on the ground that by operation of law after Amendment Act 2014 having retrospective effect – In such cases it is open to Supreme Court to exercise its plenary power under Article 142. (Para 27)
       (1971) 2 SCC 200 – Relied upon
       (c) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Section 114 of the Section 114 – Review – Impugned judgment, (2011) 12 SCC 695 – NTC claiming to be in possession of suit property as agent of Central Government – Court, in impugned judgment, holding that rights which had vested absolutely in the Central Government including in respect of the suit property, stood transferred to and vested in the appellant NTC on coming into force of the 1995 Act w.e.f. 1st April, 1994 – Held, view taken by the Court does not merit any review – Section 3, Act, 1995 as amended by Act 2014. (Para 29, 33)
       (2009) 10 SCC 464; (2013) 8 SCC 337; (1923) Vol. L (IA) 324 – Referred
       (d) Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947/1999 – Section 5 – Podar Mills – Management taken over by Central Government – On expiry of the lease term on 21st October, 1990, Podar Mills becoming protected tenant or statutory tenant – Vesting of rights of Podar Mills in Central Government continuing – Even after coming into force of 1999 Act and repeal of 1947 Act – Real tenant Union of India could be evicted in accordance with the Act by filing eviction petition before Rent Controller – Instantly, however, suit filed against only NTC and that too in a civil court – Suit decreed and affirmed vide impugned judgment – Rendered without jurisdiction – Such decree or undertaking given by NTC to vacate cannot be enforced. (Para 34, 35, 37)
       (e) Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act, 1995 – Section 3(3) as amended by Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Laws (Amendment and Validation) Act, 2014 – Leasehold rights – Not defined in Textile Undertakings (Taking over of Management) Act, 1983 or in 1995 Act or the concerned Rent Act – The expression can be discerned from the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 – “Leasehold rights” must receive wider meaning so as to encompass “statutory tenancy rights” – Podar Mills becoming protected tenant under Rent Act – It would continue to enjoy that right even after determination of the lease – That status being acquired by Central Government by operation if law, eviction can only be soght under Rent Act. (Para 39, 41, 42, 43)
       (2007) 5 SCC 745; (1992) 3 SCC 1 – Referred
       (1991) 1 SCC 343 – Distinguished
       (f) Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act, 1995 as amended by Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Laws (Amendment and Validation) Act, 2014 – Section 39 – Making explicit that provisions of amendment Act shall have and shall be deemed always to be in force at all material times – Central Government acquiring status of protected or statutory tenant qua suit property from earlier date and continuing to remain so – Could be evicted only under rent legislation – Decree passed against NTC is on the assumption that the 1999 Act had no application to the suit property as the right had vested in NTC – which did not enjoy the protection of the 1999 Act – Already held that 1995 Act applies to suit property – Held, subject suit and proceedings arising from or in relation thereto cannot proceed in law – More so NTC not being real tenant. (Para 49)
       (2014) 12 SCC 696; (1978) 2 SCC 50; (1969) 2 SCC 283 – Distinguished
       (g) Interpretation of statute – Lease to Podar Mills – Expiring in 1990 – After expiry of lease Podar Mils becoming protected or statutory tenant – On determination of lease in 1990 eviction suit filed and decree passed under transfer of Property Act 1882 – Central Government taking over management of Podar Mills under Textile Undertakings (Taking over of Management) Act, 1983 – Handing it to NTC in 1994 in accordance with provisions of Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act, 1995 – Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 repealing 1947 Act providing for eviction of statutory tenants only under Rent Act – Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Laws (Amendment and Validation) Act, 2014 providing for transfer and vesting leasehold rights in Central Government with retrospective effect, from 1994 – Thereafter Central Government becoming real tenant of the suit property – Could not be evicted except under Rent Act – Decree passed under TP Act, that too against NTC which accordingly giving undertaking to vacate – All proceedings, held, becoming without jurisdiction and undertaking given by NTC unenforceable. (Para 51, 55)
       (2014) 12 SCC 696; (1978) 2 SCC 50; (1969) 2 SCC 283; (2001) 1 SCC 516; (1989) Supp. (2) SCC 418; (1990) 1 SCC 259 – Distinguished
       Facts of the case:
       Union of India is seeking review of the judgment and order passed on September 5, 2011 in Civil Appeal No.7448 of 2011: National Textile Corporation Ltd. Versus Nareshkumar Badrikumar Jagad & Ors., (2011) 12 SCC 695. At the same time, the appellant National Textile Corporation Ltd. has filed an application for directions including for extension of time.
       Respondent Nos.1 to 6 in the review petition who were respondent Nos.1 to 6 in the aforementioned civil appeal, have filed contempt petition for initiating appropriate action against the appellant NTC. During the pendency of the review petition, an Ordinance was promulgated titled as the Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Laws (Amendment and Validation) Ordinance, 2014 which later on became The Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Laws (Amendment and Validation) Act, 2014, as a result of which the Union of India has filed an application for urging additional grounds in the Review Petition.
       Finding of the Court:
       All proceedings are without jurisdiction.
       Result: (i) Application for condonation of delay in filing review petition is allowed;
       (ii) Application for urging additional grounds in the review petition is allowed;
       (iii) The review petition is disposed of with liberty to the respondents (Trust) to pursue other appropriate legal remedy as per law;
       (iv) Contempt petition stands disposed of with liberty to the respondents as aforementioned;
       (v) Application for direction filed by the NTC is also disposed of in the above terms;
       (vi) All applications are disposed of in the above terms. There shall be no order as to costs.

ORDER

A.M. Khanwilkar, J.

1. Union of India has filed this review petition seeking review of the judgment and order passed by this Court on September 5, 2011 in Civil Appeal No.7448 of 2011: National Textile Corporation Ltd. Versus Nareshkumar Badrikumar Jagad & Ors., (2011) 12 SCC 695 At the same time, the appellant National Textile Corporation Ltd. (for short “NTC”) has filed an application for directions including for extension of time.

Whereas, respondent Nos.1 to 6 in the review petition (for short “respondents”) who were respondent Nos.1 to 6 in the aforementioned civil appeal, have filed contempt petition for initiating appropriate action against the appellant NTC. During the pendency of the review petition, an Ordinance was promulgated titled as the Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Laws (Amendment and Validation) Ordinance, 2014 which later on became The Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Laws (Amendment and Validation) Act, 2014 (for short “Validation Act 2014”), as a result of which the Union of India has filed an application for urging additional grounds in the Review Petition. As the issues to be decided in these proceedings are overlapping, we propose to deal with the same by this common order.

2. Briefly stated, the property in question admeasuring 12118 square yards of land, bearing Plot No.9 in Survey No.73 of Lower Parel Division, N.M. Joshi Marg, Chinchpokli, Mumbai, originally belonged to one Damodar Tapidas and Dayabhai Tapidas. They executed a lease deed on 11th March, 1893 in favour of one Hope Mills Ltd. The demise was for 99 years to expire on 21st October, 1990. A structure was erected to house a cotton mill on the property. The original suit land owners sold and conveyed the said land to one Harichand Rupchand by a sale deed dated 22nd February, 1907. As per the Will of Harichand Rupchand, the property vested in a public charitable trust by the name of Seth Harichand Rupchand Charitable Trust (for short “the Trust”). The respondents are the present trustees of the said Trust. The leasehold rights then stood transferred from Hope Mills Ltd. to Prospect Mills Ltd. and thereafter to Diamond Spinning and Weaving Co. Pvt. Ltd. By an indenture of Lease dated 25th October, 1926, the property, namely, the said land and structures thereon, were demised to Toyo Podar Cotton Mills Ltd. (whose name was subsequently changed to Podar Mills Ltd.) for the residue of the unexpired period of lease of 99 years commencing from 22nd October, 1891, subject to the same terms and conditions as in the original lease deed dated 11th March, 1893.

3. The Textile Undertakings (Taking over of Management) Act, 1983 (for short “1983 Act”) was enacted by Parliament in order to take over the management of 13 textile undertakings, including Podar Mills, pending their nationalisation. The lease granted in favour of Podar Mills Ltd. expired by efflux of time on 21st October, 1990. However, it continued to occupy the suit property as a protected or statutory tenant in terms of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (for short “1947 Act”). The Trust issued a legal notice dated 2nd December, 1994 to the NTC terminating its tenancy qua the suit property. The Parliament enacted the Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act, 1995 (for short “1995 Act”), which was deemed to have come into force on 1st April, 1994.

4. On 18th July, 1995, the Trust (through respondents/trustees) filed a suit for eviction being TER Suit 680/1568/1995, against Podar Mills Ltd. (defendant No.1), NTC (defendant No.2) and Union of India (defendant No.3) under the provisions of the 1947 Act. The reliefs claimed in the said suit read thus:

“The Plaintiffs, therefore, pray that :
(a) the Defendants No.2&3 be ordered and decree to quit, vacate and hand over quiet, vacant and peaceful possession of the suit Plot No.9, Cadastral Survey No.73 of Lower Parel Division situated at Delisle Road, (Now known as N.M. Joshi Marg), Bombay400011 to th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2018 Supreme(SC) 1184

Cases Referred (14)