MD. USMAN KHAN Vs. HARI SAHU AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the owner of a shop house in the town of Balasore, and opposite party No. 1 is the tenant. The opposite party No. 1 applied to the House Controller Rent under Sec. of the Orissa House Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for a direction to the petitioner-landlord to effect repairs of the premises occupied by him on the allegation that on account of non-repair the shop premises was no more habitable. The petitioner-landlord resisted the claim before the Controller and contended that the house was more than 100 years old and it did require pulling down and reconstruction. The tenant was asked to vacate the possession to enable such reconstruction, but he has not done so. The municipality has already issued notice declaring the construction to be dangerous.

(2.) The Controller raised two questions for determination:

(3.) Under the Transfer of Property Act which is the general law on the subject it is ordinarily the duty of the the tenant to keep the accommodation in good repairs and to hand over the possession of the accommodation in the very condition in which it was taken Steuart & Co. Ltd. Vs. Mackertich, AIR 1963 Calcutta 198. The Rent Control Acts have reversed this obligation and have imposed a statutory obligation on the landlord to maintain the accommodation in good condition by effecting necessary repairs. Several rent control legislations have provisions for the same (See Sec. 37 of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1965, Sec. 22 of the Madras Rent Control Act, 1960, and Sec. 20 of the Rajasthan Premises Rent Control Act, 1950). In the Delhi Rent Control Act of 1958 provision has been made for eviction of the tenant where the landlord satisfies the Controller that for the purpose of repairs such eviction is necessary. In Orissa the provision for effecting of repairs has for the first time been incorporated in Sec. 10 of the Orissa House Rent Control Act of 1967. The relevant provision is as follows: