Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

8. Under the Act of 1952, Section 2 (j) defines ‗tenant' as follows..............

9. According to the definition there is no provision for devolution of tenancy rights upon any of the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased tenant. Under the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, the definition of ‗tenant' does not include a person against whom an order or decree for eviction has been made. In the instant case a decree for eviction was passed against Sita Ram on 14 January, 1958 and as such he was not a tenant within the meaning Section 2

This definition has been amended by Act 18 of 1976 but the amended definition also provides by Section 2(1)(A) that the word "tenant" shall not include any person against whom an order or decree for eviction has been made, except where such decree or order for eviction is liable to be reopened under the proviso to Section 3 of the amending Act of 1976. It is thus clear that insofar as the Delhi Rent Control Act is concerned, a person against whom an order or a decree for eviction has been passed cannot, generally, be regarded as a tenant. The question which requires consideration is whether the definition of "tenant" contained in the Delhi Rent Control Act can be extended to proceedings under the Slum Clearance Act, or, in other words, whether the word "tenant" which occurs in clause (a) of Section 19(1) of the Slum Clearance Act bears the same meaning which it has under the Delhi Rent Control Act.

16. Learned counsel for the respondent relied very strongly on a decision of this Court in Lakhmi Chand Khemani v. Kauran Devi3 in support of his submission that the word "tenant" must bear the same meaning in the Slum Clearance Act as in the Delhi Rent Control Act. We are unable to appreciate how the judgment in that case supports the contention of the respondent. All that was decided therein was that a person against whom an order for eviction is passed cannot be a tenant within the meaning of the Delhi Rent Control Act and that the definition of the word "tenant" as contained in that Act would not be affected by anything contained in Section 19 of the Slum Clearance Act. The AIR 1961 SC 1602: (1962)2 SCR 125 AIR 1972 Delhi 34 (1966)2 SCR 544 : AIR 1966 SC 1003 question which arose in that case was whether Section 50 of the Delhi Rent Control Act barred the jurisdiction of the civil court to entertain a suit in relation to any premises to which that Act applied, for eviction of a "tenant" therefrom. Not only that no question arose in that case as to whether the definition of "tenant" as contained in the Delhi Rent Control Act should be extended to the Slum Clearance Act, but the Court observed expressly that:

17. At the same time the Supreme Court also held that the definition of the word tenant as contained in Delhi Rent Control Act which does not include a person against whom decree or order of eviction has been passed would not be affected by anything contained in Section 19 of the Slum Clearance Act.

18. As is apparent from the aforesaid decisions, the definition of a tenant for the purposes of Delhi Rent Control Act is less wider than the definition of a tenant for the purposes of Slum Clearance Act. For the purpose of Delhi Rent Control Act the tenant does not include a person against whom decree of eviction has been passed whereas for the purpose of Slum Clearance Act tenant is inclusive of a person against whom ejectment decree has been passed. It is rightly so as the object of Slum Clearance Act was not to evict the tenant from the premises without the permission from the Competent Authority.