HARKESH CHAND versus KRISHAN GOPAL MEHTA & ORS.

HARKESH CHAND versus KRISHAN GOPAL MEHTA & ORS.

The notification dated 31st March 1949 applying the 1947 Act to Doiwala continued to operate after its repeal by virtue of Section 24 of the Uttar Pradesh General Clauses Act, 1904, as there was no express provision to the contrary, no inconsistency, and no supersession by a new statutory instrument; consequently, the tenant's protection continued and eviction suit without permission was untenable.

Parties
Appellant: Harkesh Chand; Respondents: Krishan Gopal Mehta & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
13 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; suit for eviction dismissed as untenable.
Legal Topics
Eviction, Statutory Notification Continuity, Repeal and Re Enactment, Tenancy Protection, Interpretation of General Clauses Act
Rent Control Property Law Eviction Statutory Notification Continuity Repeal and Re Enactment Tenancy Protection Interpretation of General Clauses Act

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Harkesh Chand

Appellant

Krishan Gopal Mehta & Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the tenancy in question was protected by United Provinces (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act, 1947 by virtue of the notification dated 31st March, 1949.
  2. 2 Whether the notification applying the 1947 Act to Doiwala continued after repeal by the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, due to Section 24 of the Uttar Pradesh General Clauses Act, 1904.
  3. 3 Whether in absence of express repeal or supersession, tenants in Doiwala area retained protection during the transition.

Ratio Decidendi

The notification dated 31st March 1949 applying the 1947 Act to Doiwala continued to operate after its repeal by virtue of Section 24 of the Uttar Pradesh General Clauses Act, 1904, as there was no express provision to the contrary, no inconsistency, and no supersession by a new statutory instrument; consequently, the tenant's protection continued and eviction suit without permission was untenable.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; suit for eviction dismissed as untenable.

Orders

  • Appellant-tenant to hand over possession of the premises to respondent after three years from date of judgment.
  • Appellant to pay a monthly rent of Rs.4,000/- to the respondent until possession is handed over.