OMPRAKASH S O MULCHAND KHATRI AND LALTAPRASAD S O BAIJNATH GUPTA Vs. FATTELAL MAGANLAL AND COMPANY AND MIYAMAL S O LYALDAS SINDHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Following the ratio in the case of (Motor General Traders and another v. State of Andhra Pradesh) A.I.R. 1984 S.C. 121 a Division Bench of this Court in the case of (Prabhakar Tanbaji Rokde v. State of Maharashtra) A.I.R. 1986 Bombay 64 had declared as unconstitutional the notification dated 6th February, 1952 issued under Clause 30 of the Central Provinces and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949 ("The HRC Order") by which houses used for residential purposes constructed on a site lying vacant on 1st January, 1951 or on a site made vacant on or after that date by demolition of such structure standing on such site, were exempted from the operation of the HRC order on the ground that indefinite continuation of exemption to such houses was arbitrary and discriminatory and, therefore, hit by Article 14 of the Constitution. Point is whether the ratio of those decisions can be extended also to indefinite continuation of outer limits in the matter of fixation of fair rent with relation to cut off date 1st April, 1940 mentioned in Clauses 6(1) and 7(1) of the HRC order.

(2.) We will first notice the principles laid down in the case of Motor General Traders (supra) and its back ground. Section 32(b) of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act (15 of 1960), exempted from the provisions of the said Act any building constructed after 26-8-1957. Point arose as to whether there was any valid justification for continuation of that exemption for years together despite changed conditions. Accepting that when the Act was brought into force in 1960 exemption to houses constructed 3 years before was valid. It is held :

(3.) In the case of Prabhakar Rokde (supra) short legislative history of the C.P. & Berar Regulation of Letting of Accommodation Act, 1946 (the Act) under which the HRC order is made, has been noticed. It is stated :