SC relied on 1995 Act to empower city's landlords

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court empowered landlords to evict tenants from shops for personal need relying mainly on Parliament's intent to confer this right on them in the 1995 Delhi Rent Control Act, which could not be enforced despite receiving Presidential assent because of the strong traders' lobby. A Bench, comprising Justices B N Agrawal and G S Singhvi, said though the 1995 Act had not been enforced, "we can take judicial notice of the fact that the legislature has, after taking note of the developments which have taken place in the past 37 years, that is substantial increase in the availability of the commercial and non-residential premises or the premises which can be let for commercial and non-residential purposes...removed the implicit embargo on the landlord's right to recover possession of the premises if the same are bona fide required by him/her." Tracing the history of rent control laws applicable to the Capital prior to independence, the Bench noticed that till 1947, there was no tangible distinction between the premises let out for residential and non-residential purposes. Why was the differentiation made in the later laws, depriving the landlord the right to evict a tenant from shops and commercial establishments? Justice Singhvi, writing the judgment for the Bench, said at the time of enactment of the law, a large number of partition-affected refugees had descended on the Capital leaving everything behind and looking at an uncertain future. To protect them from harassment at the hands of landlords and allow them to carry on with their business unhindered by threat of eviction, the government had restricted the right of the owners to recover possession of only those premises rented out for residential purposes, the Bench said. There had been a sea change in the scenario, 50 years after the enactment of law, it said. The availability of buildings and premises which could be let out for non-residential or commercial purposes had substantially increased, it said. Talking about the refugees who came to Delhi after partition, Justice Singhvi said: "Those who came from West Pakistan as refugees and even their next generations have settled down in different parts of the country, more particularly in Punjab, Haryana, Delhi and surrounding areas." "They are occupying prime positions in the political and bureaucratic set-up of the government and have earned huge wealth in different trades, occupations, business and similar ventures," he said. Hence, the reason for differentiating the rights of a landlord with regard to residential premises and commercial set-up or shop, mainly to protect the refugee tenants from eviction, no longer exists, the Bench inferred. It said that landlords should be given equal right in seeking vacation of residential and commercial premises, if it was required for their bona fide personal need. dhananjay.mahapatra@timesgroup.com
19 Apr 2008, 0317 hrs IST , Dhananjay Mahapatra , TNN
THE TIMES OF INDIA