RAMAN ARORA Vs. SUSHEEL KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Mohan Srivastava, learned Advocate appearing for revision applicant and Shri Vijay Prakash Mishra, learned Advocate appearing for tenant respondent.

(2.) By means of this revision application, revision applicant has questioned the order passed by Additional District Judge, Court No. 15, Bulandshahar dtd. 15/7/2023 whereby it has upheld the maintainability of eviction suit instituted by the landlord before the Judge Small Causes taking a legal view of the enforcement of the Act, namely, Act No. 16 of 2021, namely the Uttar Pradesh Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021 with effect from the date of its publication in the gazette on 24/8/2021. Questioning the maintainability of suit before the Judge Small Causes Court, the tenant had taken the objection that the ordinance that had later on got converted into an enactment was enforced on 11/1/2021 and, therefore, the Act would be taken to have commenced with effect from 11/1/2021 in view of sub-sec. 4 of Sec. -1 of the U.P. Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021.

(3.) Learned Advocate appearing for tenant/ revision applicant has argued that statute enacted by competent legislature would prevail upon ordinance, government order and executive notifications including notification of the act in Gazette and, therefore, once the Act itself provided for its enforcement vide Sec. 1 (4), with effect from 11/1/2021, the court took an erroneous view in law that its enforcement would be taken to be with effect from date of its publication in the official gazette.