ANAND NIVAS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. ANANDJI KALYANJIS PEDHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In my opinion this appeal should succeed.

(2.) The respondent landlords demised certain premises to Maneklal Mafatlal for a term of five years from March 5, 1950. The tenant continued in possession after the expiry of the term under the protection from eviction given by the Bombay Rents and Lodging House Rates (Control) Act, 1947, which came into force on February 2, 1948. On April 27, 1956, the landlords filed a suit against him for eviction for non-payment of rent and obtained a decree on June 22, 1960. While this suit was pending the tenant sub-let a part of the demised premises to the appellant. In execution of the decree the landlords got possession of a small part of the premises which was in the actual occupation of the tenant. As to the rest, the sub-tenants in possession including the appellant resisted eviction. The appellant in fact filed a suit against the landlords claiming that under S. 14 of the Act it had upon the determination of the interest of the tenant in the premises by the decree against him become their direct tenant of the portion sub-let to it and asking for a permanent injunction restraining the landlords from evicting it. In that suit the appellant made an application for an interim injunction but the application was rejected by the trial Court and on appeal therefrom by the appellant Court. The appellant then moved the High Court of Gujarat in revision and the High Court confirmed the orders of the Courts below holding that after the expiry of the term, the tenant had no power of sub-letting and the appellant, therefore, was not a sub-tenant and it was not entitled to any injunction. The correctness of this judgment of the High Court is challenged in this appeal.

(3.) The protection under which the tenant in this case stayed on after the expiry of his lease was given by sub-s. (1) of S. 12 of the Act which provides that a landlord shall not be entitled to the recovery of possession of any premises so long as the tenant pays rent and observes and performs the conditions of the tenancy as provided in the section. The tenant contemplated in sub-s. (1) of S.12 plainly a tenant whose lease had come to an end. The Act at various places uses the word, "tenant" as including such a person and also defines the word "tenant" in S. 5(11)(b) as including "any person remaining, after the determination of the lease, in possession, with or without the assent of the landlord, of the premises leased to such person..................". Such a person has been called a statutory tenant and I shall also use that description for economy of expression.