SADHU RAM Vs. RAM MURTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will dispose of two revision petitions Sadhu Ram v. Ram Murti, Civil Revision No. 677 of 1975, and Sadhu Ram v. Parmshwari Devi. etc., Civil ' Revision No. 678 of 1975, as both the revision petitions involve similar question of law.

(2.) The petitioner Sadhu Ram filed an application under section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1939, hereinafter referred as the Punjab Act, for ejectment of the respondent from house No. 1207/4/A Bengali Mohalla, Ambala Cantt., on the grounds of non-payment of rent and personal necessity. The respondent contested the petition, denied the existence of the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties and also the receipt of the notice terminating his tenancy. On the first date of hearing the arrears of rent, interest and costs as assessed by the Rent Controller were tendered and accepted. After recording the evidence, the learned Rent Controller. held that the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties had not been proved, and that the petitioner had no bona fide need to occupy the house in dispute. In view of the said findings, the application of the petitioner was dismissed vide his order dated October 3, 1973. On appeal, the learned District Judge (Appellate Authority) held that after the repeal of the Punjab Act and the enforcement of the Haryana Urban Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973, the Sub-Judge, who exercised the powers of Rent Controller under the Punjab Act had ceased to have jurisdiction as Rent Controller. The order passed by the bent Controller, therefore, was held to be nullity and set aside, leaving the petitioner to avail his remedy before the competent authority. Aggrieved against the order of the Appellate Court, the petitioner has come up in this revision petition.

(3.) The house in dispute is situate at Ambala Cantt. and the Punjab Act was extended to this area by the Central Government vide a notification No. SRO 7 dated November 21, 1969, under section 3 of the Cantonment Extension of (Rent Control) Act, 1957. Under the Punjab Act the jurisdiction to exercise the power of Rent Controller had been conferred by a notification on the sub-Judges, which empowered them to exercise jurisdiction within their respective areas. By virtue of this notification the powers of the Rent Controller were being exercised by the Sub-Judges at Ambala Cantt. The State of Haryana repealed the Punjab Act and enforced the Haryana Act with effect from April 25, 1973 in the State of Haryana. However, the pending proceedings were exempted from the operation of the Haryana Act as provided under Section 24 of the said Act. The State of Haryana then issued a notification on September 7, 1973. under section 2 (b) of the Haryana Act, whereby the powers of the Rent Controller were conferred on the Sub-Divisional Officers (Civil). Later on Section 20-A, was introduced in the Haryana Act by way of an amendment and the amending Act was enforced with effect from January 25, 1974. Under the provisions of said Section 10-A, all pending proceedings in the Courts of Sub-Judges were required to be transferred to the Rent Controllers appointed under the Haryana Act. Thereafter, Central Government issued a notification No. SRO 171 on May 1, 1974, whereby the Haryana Act was extended to the Cantonment areas falling within the territory of the State of Haryana. The Haryana Act was, however, extended retrospectively with effect from April 25, 1973, when that Act was enforced in the State of Haryana.