NDLI: B. N. Mutto & Anr. Vs. T. K. Nandi

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Delhi Rent Control Act 1978- Section 14 (1)(e)
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Delhi Rent Control Act, 1952 (38 of 1952)
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 - Ss. 14(I)(e), 14A and 258(5) - Scope of. Section 14 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 prohibits a court from making any order or decree in favour of a landlord for recovery of possession of any premises except under certain circumstances. One of the grounds on which the landlord can make an application to the Rent Controller for recovery of possession as provided in s. 14(1)(e) of the Act is that the premises let for residential purposes are required bonafide by the landlord for occupation as a residence for himself and that the landlord has no other reasonably suitable residential accommodation.In September, 1975 the Central Government decided that Government servants who owned houses in the Union Territory of Delhi should, within three months from 1st October, 1975, vacate Government accommodation let out to them. By the Delhi Rent Control Act (Amendment) Ordinance, 1975 the Act was amended and eventually the Amendment Act, 1976 replaced the Ordinance. By a deeming provision the Act came into force on the date of the Ordinance i.e. 1st December, 1975.Section 14A which was added by the amendment Act provides that a landlord who, being a person in occupation of any residentiai premises allotted to him by the Central Government is required to vacate such residential accommodation on the ground that he owns in the Union Territory of Delhi a residential accommodation, a right shall accrue to such landlord to recover immediately possession of the premises let out by him. Section 25B provides for special procedure for disposal of application for eviction under s. 14(1) (e) and s. 14A, Section 25B provides that when an application is filed by the landlord under either s. 14(1)(e) or s. 14A, the tenant shall not contest the prayer for eviction unless he files an affidavit and obtains leave from the Controller. Sub~section (5) requires that the affidavit filed by the tenant should disclose such facts as would disentitle the landlord from obtaining an order for the recovery of possession of the premises on the ground specified in s. 14 (1)(e) or s. 14A. The appellant (landlord) let out his residential accommodation in New Delhi to the respondent (tenant). The landlord was a Government servant who had been allotted Government accommodation in New Delhi. On 9th December, 1975 the Government issued a notice to the landlord calling upon him to vacate Government accomodation allotted to him. In the meantime the landlord retired from service on 30th November, 1975. On 9th December, 1975 the landlord filed a petition for eviction of the tenant from his house. The tenant raised three objections as to the maintainability of the petition: (i) that the landlord could not invoke the provisions of s. 25B(5) because he was not a Government servant on the date of the petition; (ii) that since the ground on which eviction was sought in the petition was the same which had already been filed by the landlord and was pending before the Rent Controller, the petition could not be entertained, and (iii) that the premises occupied by him were let out for residential or professional purposes and therefore the landlord was not entitled to ask for eviction as the premises were not let for residential purposes alone. The Rent Controller rejected all the contentions and refused leave to the tenant to defend the landlord's eviction petition. He held that (i) the question whether the landlord was a Government servant or not on the date when the notice was received and on the date when he filed a petition was irrelevant so long as he satisfied the requirements laid down in s. 14(1). (ii) the ground for eviction under s. 14A was a new cause of action and different from the one raised in the previous petition and, therefore the petition was not barred, (iii) it was not necessary for an application under s. 14(1) that the building should have been let for residential purposes as required under s. 14(l)(e), it is sufficient if the landlord required the premises for residential accommodation.Allowing the tenant's revision, the High Court held that since the landlord had retired from service on 30th November, 1975 before the Ordinance came into force, the tenant was not liable to vacate the premises independently of his ownership in the premises in dispute.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice P.S. Kailasam
Neutral Citation	1978 INSC 244
Petitioner	B. N. Mutto & Anr.
Respondent	T. K. Nandi
SCR	[1979] 2 S.C.R. 409
Judgement Date	1978-11-29
Case Number	2302

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

B. N. Mutto & Anr. Vs. T. K. Nandi

Please Log-in to view this content

Rashida Begum Vs. General Sales Ltd.

Liaq Ahmed and Ors. Vs. Shri Habeeb-ur-rehman

Kusum Lata Sharma Vs. Arvind Singh

M/s. Bharat Sales Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Smt. Lakshmi Devi and Ors.

Dr. K. Madan Vs. Krishnawati (smt.) and Another

Satyawati Sharma (dead) By Lrs. Vs. Union of India and Anr.

M/s Cox and Kings Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Smt. Chander Malhotra

K,m. Abdul Razzak Vs. Damodharan

Duli Chand (dead) By L.rs. Vs. Jagmender Dass

B. N. Mutto & Anr. Vs. T. K. Nandi

B. N. Mutto & Anr. Vs. T. K. Nandi

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Rashida Begum Vs. General Sales Ltd.

Liaq Ahmed and Ors. Vs. Shri Habeeb-ur-rehman

Kusum Lata Sharma Vs. Arvind Singh

M/s. Bharat Sales Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Smt. Lakshmi Devi and Ors.

Dr. K. Madan Vs. Krishnawati (smt.) and Another

Satyawati Sharma (dead) By Lrs. Vs. Union of India and Anr.

M/s Cox and Kings Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Smt. Chander Malhotra

K,m. Abdul Razzak Vs. Damodharan

Duli Chand (dead) By L.rs. Vs. Jagmender Dass

B. N. Mutto & Anr. Vs. T. K. Nandi