ABANI KUMAR GOSWAMI Vs. RAMGOPAL PATWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLAINTIFF is the tenant of the disputed house belonging to defdt.-l (the landlord ). On 3-10-1961 the landlord filed an application before the House Rent Controller, cuttack, for eviction of the plaintiff under Section 7 of the Orissa House Rent control Act, 1958 (Orissa Act XXXI of 1958) hereinafter referred to as the Act on the allegations that the plff. had sublet the house and that he required it for his own business. The tenant challenged both the grounds as frivolous. The House rent Controller dismissed the application holding that the Landlord failed to substantiate any of the grounds. The A. D. M. Cuttack (defdt.-2) rejected the case of sub-letting but held that the landlord required the house in good faith for his own occupation. He accordingly passed an order of eviction (Ext. 4) on 1-10-63 directing the tenant to give vacant possession of the suit premisses to the landlord by 15-11-63. The tenant filed O. J. C. 344/1963 which was not admitted. The plff. filed the suit for a declaration that the order (Ext. 4) was ultra vires and without jurisdiction and that consequently Execution Case No. 193 of 1963 filed by defdt.-l in the Court of the first Munsiff, Cuttack, was inexecutable. Defendant-1 contested the suit alleging that Ex. 4 was legal within jurisdiction and executable.

(2.) THE learned trial Court accepted the case of defdt.-l and dismissed the suit. Plaintiff has filed the first appeal.

(3.) THE sole contention advanced by Mr. Mohanty in support of the appeal, is that ex. 4 is without jurisdiction inasmuch as no notice under Section 106 of the transfer of Property Act, terminating the contractual tenancy, was served on the tenant by the landlord. The Act does not abrogate compliance with Section 106 of the T. P. Act. This contention requires careful examination of the cope and ambit of Section 6 of the Act.