NANAKRAM KAKUBHAI AND COMPANY Vs. KUNDALRAI:NATHMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are two civil appeals by special leave. The question common to these appeals is whether a lease concluded between a landlord and a tenant in contravention of Cl. 22 of the Central Provinces and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rent Control Order') can be assailed by the landlord as a void transaction in a proceeding between the parties to the lease

(2.) Civil Appeal No. 5317 of 1983 is concerned with a shop described as Block No. 5 in a non-residential building situated in Dharampeth, Nagpur. The respondent is the landlord and the appellant is the tenant. The building was constructed before January 1, 1967, and the appellant became a tenant from October 1, 1968.

(3.) Clause 13 of the Rent Control Order provides that no landlord can determine a lease except with the previous written permission of the Controller, for which he must apply in writing to the Controller. Cl. 13(3)(vi) provides that if after hearing the parties the Controller is satisfied that the landlord needs the premises for himself the Controller must grant the landlord permission to determine the lease. On January 19, 1980 the respondent petitioned the Controller for permission on the ground that he required the premises occupied by the appellant as his son wanted to commence business therein.