W. H. KING versus REPUBLIC OF INDIA AND ANOTHER.
Handing over possession for consideration by a tenant to a third person, with the tenant giving up all claims, constitutes assignment, not relinquishment within the meaning of section 19(1) of the Bombay Rent Control Act, as relinquishment requires surrender to the landlord by mutual agreement. The conviction under section 19(2) cannot be sustained in the absence of relinquishment as defined.
- Parties
- Appellant: W. H. King; Respondent No. 1: Republic of India; Respondent No. 2 / Complainant: Mulchand Kodumal Bhatia
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 01 February 1952
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Order in Criminal Appeal No. 106 of 1950 Dated 20th February 1950, Arising From the Presidency Magistrate, Bombay, Case No. 10879/p of 1949
- Outcome
- Conviction set aside
- Legal Topics
- Bombay Rent Control, Relinquishment Vs. Assignment of Tenancy, Strict Construction of Penal Statutes
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
W. H. King
Appellant
Republic of India
Respondent No. 1
Mulchand Kodumal Bhatia
Respondent No. 2 / Complainant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Order in Criminal Appeal No. 106 of 1950 Dated 20th February 1950, Arising From the Presidency Magistrate, Bombay, Case No. 10879/p of 1949
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether handing over possession by a tenant to a third party for 'pugree' constitutes 'relinquishment' of tenancy under section 19(1) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947
- 2 Difference between assignment and relinquishment in tenancy law
- 3 Interpretation of penal statutes under Indian law
Ratio Decidendi
Handing over possession for consideration by a tenant to a third person, with the tenant giving up all claims, constitutes assignment, not relinquishment within the meaning of section 19(1) of the Bombay Rent Control Act, as relinquishment requires surrender to the landlord by mutual agreement. The conviction under section 19(2) cannot be sustained in the absence of relinquishment as defined.
Court Disposition
Conviction set aside
Orders
- Fine of Rs. 30,000 to be refunded if already paid
- Other directions of the Presidency Magistrate regarding Rs. 1,000 and Rs. 29,500 to stand as ordered
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment