Case Note & Summary
The case arises from a landlord-tenant dispute under the Goa Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968. The respondent, Luis Sales de Andrade e Souza, is the landlord of premises let out to Namdeo Parsuram Satardekar (since deceased) under an agreement dated 10.11.1956, which prohibited sub-letting without written consent. The petitioners are the heirs of the deceased tenant. The respondent filed an application under Section 32(4) of the Rent Act seeking eviction on the ground that the tenant had sub-let the premises without consent. The Rent Controller dismissed the application. On appeal, the Appellate Board, by order dated 19.07.2014, allowed the application and ordered eviction. Subsequently, the respondent filed a review application before the same Board, which by the impugned order dated 30.09.2017, reviewed and set aside its earlier order, thereby dismissing the eviction application. The petitioners challenged the review order before the High Court. The core legal issue was whether the Appellate Board has the power to review its own judgment. The High Court examined the provisions of the Rent Act, particularly Section 41(1) which constitutes the Appellate Board, and found no express or implied power of review. The court held that a statutory tribunal cannot assume review jurisdiction unless expressly conferred. The court distinguished the power of review from the power to correct clerical errors, which is not the case here. The court also noted that the Board had become functus officio after passing the original order. Consequently, the High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the review order, and restored the Appellate Board's original order dated 19.07.2014 granting eviction.
Headnote
A) Rent Control - Review Power - Appellate Board - Section 41(1) Goa Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968 - The Appellate Board has no power to review its own judgment and order as the Act does not confer any review power, either expressly or by necessary implication. The Board cannot assume such power in the absence of a statutory provision. (Paras 1, 10-12) B) Rent Control - Eviction - Sub-letting - Section 32(4) Goa Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968 - The respondent landlord sought eviction on ground of sub-letting by tenant without written consent. The Appellate Board initially allowed the application under Section 32(4) but later reviewed and set aside its order. The High Court held that the review was without jurisdiction. (Paras 2-5, 13) C) Rent Control - Review - Inherent Power - Section 41(1) Goa Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968 - The Appellate Board, being a creature of statute, cannot exercise inherent power of review unless expressly conferred. The principle that a tribunal cannot review its own decision unless statute permits applies. (Paras 10-12)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Appellate Board constituted under Section 41(1) of the Goa Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968 has power to review its own judgment and order, and if yes, whether the Appellate Board was justified in reviewing its earlier order dated 19.07.2014 granting an application under Section 32(4) of the Rent Act.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the impugned order dated 30.09.2017 passed by the Appellate Board, and restored the order dated 19.07.2014 passed by the Appellate Board allowing the application under Section 32(4) of the Rent Act.
Law Points
- Appellate Board under Section 41(1) of Goa Buildings (Lease
- Rent and Eviction) Control Act
- 1968 has no inherent or statutory power to review its own judgment
- Review application not maintainable in absence of express provision
- Order granting eviction under Section 32(4) cannot be reviewed
