BHARATH GOLD MINES LTD Vs. KANNAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition is directed against the order of the House Rent Controller, Kolar Gold Field Area in case No. HRC 1 to 6/1981-82. Briefly the facts are :

(2.) The Bharath Gold Mine Limited, a Public Company registered under the Companies Act, wholly and solely owned by the Government of India, demanded higher rent from some of its tenants in respect of non-residential premises owned by the Company. Some of the tenants agreed to pay the rents and some did not. Those of them who did not, approached the Rent Controller under Section 14 of the Karnataka Rent Control Act for fixation of fair rent for the premises occupied by them. The Bharat Gold Mines Ltd., a petitioner in this petition resisted on the sole ground that the Karnataka Rent Control Act was not operative in so far as the premises belonging to the Company were concerned and therefore the Rent Controller had no jurisdiction to decide the fair rent under Section 14 of the Karnataka Rent Control Act. The crux of the argument was that the premises owned by the Company were covered by the Public Premises (Eviction of unauthorised Occupants), Act, 1971, and therefore there was an ouster of jurisdiction of the Karnataka Rent Control Act. That contention was rejected by the Rent Controller. Against that order of rejection, the present petition is filed inter alia contending the same as was contended before the Rent Controller.

(3.) Mr. K. J. Shetty, learned Counsel for the petitioners, has drawn my attention to the ruling of the Supreme Court in the case of Jain Ink Manufacturing Company v. Life Insurance Corporation & Anr., AIR1981 SC 670 , 1982 (2 )SCALE1382 , (1980 )4 SCC435 , [1981 ]1 SCR498 . In that decision, the Supreme Court in unmistakable terms has laid down that the eviction of Unauthorised Occupants Act, 1971 has over-riding effect over the Delhi Rent Control Act giving more than one reason. One of the reasons given is that it is a special enactment and also for the reason that the Unauthorised Occupants Eviction Act was enacted in 1971 much later than the Delhi Rent Control Act. Therefore, a building owned by the Life Insurance Corporation of India, the ownership having been conferred on it by purchase of the property in Court auction, the termination of tenancy, eviction, etc., would be covered by the Unauthorised Occupants Eviction Act, 1971. That decision is binding on this Court. Nor can this Court distinguish it on facts.