THE UNION OF INDIA (UOI), BY THE DIVISIONAL ENGINEER, TELEGRAPHS, FORMERLY OF THE MADRAS DIVISION NOW BIFURCATED AND IN CHARGE OF THE TIRUCHIRAPALLI DIVISION Vs. V.M.P. SWAMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition by the Union of India for revising and setting aside the order of the District Judge, South Arcot, in C.M.P. No. 468 of 1957, who had dismissed that revision petition and confirmed the order of eviction passed against the petitioner by the Appellate Authority, the Subordinate Judge of Cuddalore, who had reversed the order of the Rent Controller who had dismissed the eviction petition in limine as not maintainable in view of a Government Order.

(2.) THE facts were briefly these : The petitioner took House No. 133, Hospital Road, Villupuram, from the landlord, Swami, the respondent herein, for running an office of the Telegraph Department. The original tenancy agreement was only to run the Office. But later on, the petitioner wanted to instal a telephone repeater -station in the premises. In spite of the objection of the respondent to the installation of that heavy machinery the repeater -station was installed in the premises, and this old house had several holes dug in the walls and floor for the installing the repeater -station and putting underground cables. There was also much vibration resultant on the installation of the repeater -station, and the respondent complained of serious damage to his old building. Finally, by his letter Exhibit B -1, dated 28th July, 1954, the respondent, who said that he wanted the building for his own use, added that he expected at least a reasonable enhanced rent because of the installation of the repeater and the putting of the house to a different and more wearing use, but left the enhanced rent to be fixed by the Divisional Engineer himself. The Divisional Engineer, however, replied that the holes made in the walls and floor would be closed when the department vacated the building, but that no enhanced rent would be paid, as demanded. This he intimated by his letter Exhibit B -3, dated 30th July, 1954.

(3.) THE landlord took the matter in appeal. The Appellate Authority, the Subordinate Judge, Cuddalore, held that the petition, was maintainable because G.O. No.2472 dated 14th May, 1948, was illegal and ultra vires, as the exemption in it was a truncated one, injurious to the subject as it did not also cover Section 7(1) of the Act and it, therefore, illegally barred the remedy of the landlord to apply for eviction under; the Transfer of Property Act, in addition to barring his remedy under the Rent Control Act. He relied on the ruling of Rajagopala Ayyangar, J., in Govindaraja Mudaliar v. State of Madras, (1955) 1 M.L.J. 492, in support of his view. Therefore, he held that the petition was maintainable, and going into the merits, held that as the building originally let out for purely office purposes had been unauthorisedly converted into other uses, like the installation of a repeater -machine and its accessories, digging holes in the walls and floor, and causing endless vibrations and damage to this old building, the tenant had rendered himself liable to be evicted, especially as the value and the utility of the building were likely to be impaired materially. So, he set aside the order of dismissal passed by the Rent Controller and directed the eviction of the petitioner, but granted two months' time to the petitioner for vacating the premises. He directed the petitioner to pay the landlord Rs. 25 as costs in the appeal, besides Rs. 25 as costs in the petition before the Controller.