Tenant filed revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act against a judgment dismissing an ejectment suit, where the lower court held the building was exempt from eviction regulations due to new construction.
Revision petition dismissed; tenant directed to vacate premises within six months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Civil Revision No. 47 of 2008
Bala Dutt ……….Revisionist Versus Trilok Singh & others ………Respondent
Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral)
Mr. Pradeep Hairia, Advocate, present for the revisionist.
2
reasoning was given by the Court below after considering the definition of Section 2 of the Act No.13 of 1972. Section 2 of the Act No.13 of 1972 stipulates certain buildings from operation of the Act. One of the of the exemptions is the second proviso along with Explanation-I (a), (b) and (c), which reads as under:-
2. Exemptions from operation of Act.- (1) Nothing in this Act shall apply to the following, namely:-
(a)…………………………….
(b)………………………….
(bb)…………………………….. (bbb)……………………………
(c)…………………………………
(d)…………………………………
(e)………………………………….
(f)………………………………….
(g)………………………………….
(h)………………………………….
(2) Except as provided in sub-section (5) of Section 12, sub-section (1-A) of Section 21, sub-section (2) of Section 24, Section 24-A, 24-B, 24-C or sub-section (3) of Section 29, nothing in this Act shall apply to a building during a period of ten years from the date on which its construction is completed:
Provided that where any building is constructed substantially out of funds obtained by way of loan or advance from the State Government or the Life Insurance Corporation of India or a bank or a cooperative society or the Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad, and the period of repayment of such loan or advance exceeds the aforesaid period of ten years then the reference to the period of fifteen years or the period ending with the date of actual repayment of such loan or advance (including interest), whichever is shorter:
Provided further that where construction of a building is completed on or after April 26, 1985 then the reference in this sub-section to the period of ten years shall be deemed to be a reference to a period of [forty years] from the date on which its construction is completed.
Explanation I.- For the purposes of this section,(a) the construction of a building shall be deemed to have been completed on the date on which the
3
completion thereof is reported to or otherwise recorded by the local authority having jurisdiction, and in the case of building subject to assessment, the date on which the first assessment thereof comes into effect, and where the said dates are different, the earliest of the said dates, and in the absence of any such report, record or assessment, the date on which it is actually occupied (not including occupation merely for the purposes of supervising the construction or guarding the building under construction) for the first time: Provided that there may be different dates of completion of construction in respect of different parts of a building which are either designed as separate units or are occupied separately by the landlord and one or more tenants or by different tenants;
(b) “construction” includes any new construction in place of an existing building which has been wholly or substantially demolished;
(c) where such substantial addition is made to an existing building that the existing building becomes only a minor part thereof the whole of the building including the existing building shall be deemed to be constructed on the date of completion of the said addition.
Explanation II.-…………………………………………… Explanation III.-…………………………………………..
(3)……………………………………………………………”
4
(Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 20.03.2014
ML
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the revision petition filed by the tenant against the lower court's judgment and decree deserves interference.
Whether the building in question falls under the exemptions of Section 2 of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 due to new construction.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Bala Dutt
Trilok Singh
Sudhanshu Dhulia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
