Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from a suit for eviction where the appellant was a monthly tenant of a plot used for an automobile garage. The respondent issued a notice to terminate the lease, which the trial court found invalid due to insufficient notice under the Transfer of Property Act. The appellate court reversed this decision, affirming the respondent's right to possession. The appellant's second appeal was dismissed by the High Court, leading to the current appeal before the Supreme Court. The appellant contended that a new Clause 13-A, introduced during the appeal's pendency, barred eviction without the landlord's written permission from the Controller. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, clarifying that Article 136 does not confer a right of appeal and that Clause 13-A does not apply to special leave petitions. The court emphasized that while it has discretionary powers, it does not convert into a court of appeal, and thus, dismissing the appeal does not equate to passing an eviction decree. The court noted that the amended definition of 'premises' and Clause 13-A had been struck down by the Bombay High Court, but this did not affect the current proceedings as no evidence of a pending appeal against that judgment was presented. The appeal was dismissed without costs.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Special Leave Petition - Nature of Discretionary Power - Article 136 of the Constitution of India - The court clarified that the discretionary power under Article 136 does not convert the court into a court of appeal, and dismissing a special leave petition does not amount to passing a decree for eviction. Held that the court's role remains limited to the exercise of discretion without conferring a right of appeal (Paras 175-176). B) Rent Control - Applicability of Clause 13-A - Central Provinces and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949 - The court held that Clause 13-A applies only to suits or proceedings pending in lower courts and does not apply to special leave petitions before the Supreme Court. Therefore, the court did not pass a decree for eviction while dismissing the appeal (Paras 177-178).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the introduction of Clause 13-A during the pendency of the appeal affects the decree for eviction.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, holding that Clause 13-A does not apply to special leave petitions and that the court's dismissal of the appeal does not equate to passing a decree for eviction.
Law Points
- Special Leave Petition
- Rent Control
- Discretionary Power
- Eviction Decree
- Clause 13-A
