The sub tenants let into possession by him did number join issue with the appel lant.
Appeal No.
On remand, the trial Court took evidence and after local inspection, made a finding that the two houses proved to have been built by the tenant must be regarded as permanent in relation to the locality of the plot.
Thereafter, the appellant applied for and obtained a certificate from the High Court and with the said certificate the present appeal has been brought before us.
Before that date, the Assam High Court had taken the view that the said provision of the Act was applicable to the pending proceedings between land lords and tenants for eviction and that was the basis on which the tenant Chetri wanted to support his appeal.
The High Court granted certificate to the appellant when it was told that the appellant proposed to challenge the companyrectness of its earlier decision holding that s. 5 of the Act applied to the pending proceedings.
The Act was passed by the Assam Legislature in order to regulate in certain respects the relationship between land lord and tenant in respect of number agricultural lands in the urban areas of the State of Assam.
Appeals from the judgment and orders dated August 1, 1958 and March 13, 1959 of the Assam High Court A. Nos.
P. Maheshwari, for respondents Nos.
549 of 1962 .
The lower appellate Court allowed the tenants plea, framed an additional issue in pursuance of it and sent the matter back to the trial Court for a finding.
569 of 1963 arises from a suit filed by the appellant Wahedulla against his tenant, the respondent Abdul Hamid.
Tulsa Devi and others.
The relevant facts are similar to those in C.A. No.
Following its earlier decision about the applicability of the provisions of s. 5 to pending proceedings, the High Court summarily dismissed the said appeal.
12 of 1955 hereinafter called the Act .
He, however, found that there was numberevidence to show when the said houses were companystructed.
549 of 1962 .
C. Chatterjee, K. P. Sen and P. K. Chatterjee, for the appellant in C.A. No.
The companyclusion of the lower appellate Court was that the two houses had been companystructed by the tenant within five years after the taking of the lease and that entitled the lessee to claim the benefit of s. 5 of the Act.
86/1958 .
have been brought on the record and will be described as respondents hereafter.
Rafiquennessa who sued the predecessor of the respondents for ejectment.
Thereafter, when the appeal came on for hearing before the lower appellate Court, the tenant filed an application praying that he should be permitted to take an additional ground under s. 5 of the Act.
1 a to 1 e in A. No.
The lower appel late Court ultimately allowed the appeal and set aside the decree passed by the trial Judge in favour of the appellant.
549/1962.
Part of the finding was challenged by the tenant before the lower appellate Court.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL Appeal No.
24/1953 .
Accordingly, a numberice to quit was served on him to vacate on the 12th February, 1952.
The trial Judge decreed the appellants claim where upon the lessee Chetri filed an appeal in the Court of the Sub Judge, Lower Assam District, Gauhati, challenging the validity and the companyrectness of the decree passed against him Civil Appeal No.
In this case also, the Act came into force while the appeal was pending before the lower appellate Court and by the application of s. 5 respondents claim to companytinue in possession has been upheld and the appellants claim for ejecting the respondent has been rejected.
The sub lessees were accordingly joined as defendants to the suit.
549 of 1962.
569 of 1963 .
Behrul Islam and R. Gopalakrishnan, for the appellant in A. No.
N. Mukherjee, for the respondent in C.A. No.
The appellant then preferred a second appeal in the High Court of Assam No.
He, however, did number companyply with the numberice and that led to the present suit by the appellant for eviction No.
The lessee Chetri alone resisted the suit.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by GAJENDRAGADKAR C.J. These two appeals which have been brought to this Court with a certificate issued by the Assam High Court, raise a short question about the companystruction and effect of section 5 of the Assam NonAgricultural Urban Area Tenancy Act, 1955 No.
149 of 1952 .
It appears that Lal Bahadur Chetri has executed a registered lease deed in favour of the appellant on the 14th February, 1946.
Thus, the only point which arises for our decision is whether the Assam High Court was right in taking the view that the provisions of s. 5 applied to the proceedings between the parties which were pending at the relevant time before the lower appellate Court.
The lease companyered an open plot of land and under the companyenant the leasee was entitled to build a house for residential purposes.
In support of her claim, the appellant alleged that the lessee had companytravened the terms of the lease inasmuch as he had sublet the premises built by him, and so, that was an additional ground for evicting the lessee.
February 24, 1964.
569/ 63 .
The appellant in this case is Mst.
While the appeal was pending, the Act was passed and was published in the Assam Gazette on the 6th July, 1955.
In the ordinary companyrse, the lease was due to expire on the 12th February, 1952, and the lessee had agreed to deliver vacant possession of the land at the expiration of the stipulated period.
Pending these proceedings, the tenant Chetri died and his heirs and legal representatives Mst.
86 of 1958 and 14 of 1959 respectively.
The relevant and material facts which have led to the suits from which these two appeals respectively arise, are similar, and so, it would number be necessary to state them in detail in regard to both the matters.
