MOTIBHAI RAMABHAI Vs. PANACHAND MOHANLAL SHAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This group of eleven petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution raises an interesting question as to the procedure to be followed by the Court of Small Causes at Ahmedabad while trying a suit by a landlord for recovery of possession of premises let to a tenant. The question is whether the evidence given by witnesses is to be recorded in the manner set out in Rule 38 of the Ahmedabad Small Cause Court Rules or in the manner prescribed by Order XVIII Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(2.) The determination of this question depends on the true interpretation of Rules 5 and 8 of the Rules made by the State Government under sec. 49 of the Bombay Rents Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Rent Act). But before we proceed to consider these Rules it would be convenient to refer to some of the relevant provisions of the Rent Act. The Rent Act was enacted for the purpose of controlling the rents of premises situate primarily in the urban areas of the State and giving protection to tenants against eviction by greedy and rapacious landlords. The Legislature with a view to making the protection really effective conferred exclusive jurisdiction on certain existing Courts under sec. 28 to entertain and try suits and proceedings between a landlord and a tenant relating to recovery of rent or possession of any premises to which the provisions of the Rent Act apply as also to decide claims or questions arising under the Rent Act or any of its provisions. Sec. 28 as pointed out by the Supreme Court in Khemchand v. Mohmedbhai (1970) 11 G.L.R. 173 did not set up new Courts to try suits or proceedings between landlord and tenant:- it merely invested existing Courts with exclusive jurisdiction to try suits and proceedings of the nature set out in the section and claims and questions arising out of any provisions of the Rent Act. It is not necessary for the purpose of the present petitions to set out the changes which sec. 28 suffered in its application to the City of Ahmedabad but suffice it to state that by reason of the amendment made in sec. 28 by the Ahmedabad City Courts Act 1961 the Court of Small Causes at Ahmedabad was given exclusive jurisdiction to entertain and try suits and proceedings of the nature set out in sec. 28 as also claims and questions arising under any provisions of the Rent Act. Sec. 17 of the Ahmedabad City Courts Act 1961 also provided that the Presidency Small Cause Courts Act 1882 shall extend to and come into force in the City of Ahmedabad on and from the appointed day and sec. 18 effected certain amendments in the Presidency Small Cause Courts Act 1882 in its application to the City of Ahmedabad. The result was that the Court of Small Causes at Ahmedabad was from and after the appointed day governed by the provisions of the Presidency Small Cause Courts Act 1882 as amended by sec. 18 of the Ahmedabad City Courts Act 1961 The Court of Small Causes at Ahmedabad governed by the provisions of the amended Presidency Small Cause Courts Act 1882 thus became by reason of the amendment in sec. 28 of the Rent Act a Court of exclusive jurisdiction to entertain and try suits and proceedings of the nature specified in sec. 28 as also claims and questions arising under the provisions of the Rent Act. Sec. 29 of the Rent Act provided for appeals against the decisions of the Courts specified in sec. 28 and conferred appellate jurisdiction on certain specified Courts to heal such appeals. Now when exclusive jurisdiction to entertain and try suits and proceedings of the nature specified in sec. 28 as also to hear appeals against decisions in such suits and proceedings was conferred on certain specified Courts the question would arise as to what procedure should be followed by such Courts in trying and hearing matters which might be brought before them under secs. 28 and 29. This question was resolved by the Legislature by enacting in sec. 21:-

(3.) In such of the following suits and proceedings as are cognizable by the Court of Small Causes Bombay on the date of the coming into force of these Rules namely