SUBRAMANIAM SHANMUGHAM Vs. M L RAJENDRAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by special leave from the judgment and order of the High Court on 13th January, 1986 ordering eviction under S. 10(3)(c), Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act. 1960, hereinafter called the Act. This is an appeal by the tenant. A room in the front portion of the building had been leased out to the tenant for non-residential purposes. The landlord resides in the other portion. The landlord needed additional accommodation for residential purposes due to marriages in the family. Was the portion let out as such separate and distinct unit for the purpose of S. 10(3)(c) of the Act It was not and as such the landlord was entitled to seek eviction of the tenant under S. 10(3)(c) of the Act. It has been so held clearly by this Court in Shri Balaganesan Metals v. M. N. Sanmugham Chetty (1987) 2 SCC 707 wherein the section has been analysed and explained. Ms. Shyamala Pappu, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the decision needs reconsideration as the residential and the non-residential part of the building covered as separate units and the requirements of the two separate parts have not been properly assessed therein. We are unable to accept this criticism. A building may consist of separate parts if the context so warrants. In the instant case as in Shri Balaganesan Metal's case the context and the user did not warrant treatment of the portion let out for non-residential user either its a separate or distinct unit. It was only a small part of the residential building and not a separate part.

(2.) It was secondly submitted that the expression "as the case may be", in the section has not been properly appreciated. We are unable to agree. The difference between residential part and the non-residential has been borne in mind by my learned brother in the judgment aforesaid.

(3.) Justice Morris in Bluston and Bramley Ltd. v. Leigh (1950) 2 All ER 29 at page No. 35 explained that the phrase "as the case may be" meant in the events that have happened. Our attention was also drawn to the expression "as the case may be" as appearing in the Words and Phrases Permanent Edition 4 page 596. The meaning of the expression "as the case may be" is what the expression says, i.e., as the situation may be, in other words in case there are separate and distinct units then concept of need will apply accordingly. Where, however, there is no such separate and distinct unit, it has no significance. There is no magic in that expression. The expression "as the case may be" has been properly construed in the judgment mentioned hereinbefore.