NARAYANA SHENOI Vs. SUBORDINATE JUDGE OF COCHIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question is whether an order for eviction made under Clause.9 of the Travancore Cochin Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Order, 1950 for short, the Order can be executed under S.14 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, XVI of 1959 for short, the Act S.36(1) whereof repealed the Order and the statute, namely, S.13 of Travancore Cochin Act V of 1950, under which the Order was made. Both common sense and justice require that it should, as the courts below have held it can, and I have no doubt that, despite what some might think the defective wording of S.33(2) of the Act, that provision expressly provides for such execution.

(2.) S.14 of the Act runs as follows:

(3.) It seems to me obvious that the second "and" in S.33(2) "should be read distributively in the sense that the clause, "and in which fair rent has been fixed" is to be understood, as a nominative clause introducing a separate subject, as if the clause read, "and all such orders and decisions in which fair rent has been fixed" (the omission of the words "all such orders and decisions" being an I think, mistaken avoidance of repetition, the orders and decisions forming the separate subject being comprised in the orders and decisions of the earlier nominative clause) and not conjunctively as introducing an adjectival clause adding a cumulative quality to the orders and decisions earlier referred to. So also the third "and" so that the deeming clause preceding this word applies to the orders and decisions referred to in the first subject clause while the continuing clause following this word applies to the orders and decisions in which fair rent has been fixed. In other words, the consequent, "shall be deemed to have been passed or given under the corresponding provision of this Act" will attach to the antecedent, "all orders passed or deemed or purporting to have been passed and all decisions given or deemed or purporting to have been given under the Travancore Cochin Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Order, 1950, or the Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1949," while the consequent, shall continue in force until they are superseded or modified under this Act by the authority competent to do so," will attach to the antecedent, "in which fair rent has been filed." That seems to me the only way in which sense and justice can be made of the section, and, in doing so, I do not think that any violence is being done to the rules of syntax or grammar.