PARAMESWARAN GOVINDAN Vs. KRISHNANBHASKARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by special leave arises against the order dated November 17,1977 made in C.R.P. No. 2341 of 1977 of the Kerala High Court which granted the decree that the respondent is a tenant under S.4A of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 (1 of 1964), for short 'the Act' and is not liable to ejectment pursuant to the decree in O.S. No. 6/64 on the file of the Munsif Magistrate, Attingal. The facts relevant are as under:

(2.) Section 132 is a repealing and saving section under the Act and sub-sec. 3(a) postulates thus:

(3.) The controversy is whether the respondent is a tenant under the Act. S. 2(57) of rs the Act defined 'tenant' means any person who has paid or has agreed to pay rent or other consideration for his being allowed to possess and enjoy any land by a person entitled to lease that land. A reading would indicate that there should exist jural relationship of landlord and tenant and pursuant to a lease for consideration possession was given and the lessee remained in possession enjoying the land on payment of rent or other consideration. Therefore, the main part of S. 2(57) does not apply to a mortgagor and mortgagee and the mortgagee cannot be treated to be a tenant. But by Amending Act 35 of 1969, S. 4A was introduced on the statute. Admittedly, it is prospective in operation. It reads thus: