Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

14. Reliance is also placed by the learned Counsel for the petitioner upon the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Ramachandran v. Raval and Co. (1969) 2 M.L.J. 8 : 82 L.W. 476 : I.L.R. (1969) 3 Mad. 584. In that case, the tenant was paying an annual rent of Rs. 3,375, an annual contribution of Rs. 225 towards repairs and a further annual contribution of Rs. 220 towards taxes; and the dispute related only to the extra Municipal tax of Rs. 1,212 which was agreed to be paid by the tenant as a result of an oral agreement subsequent to the original registered agreement of lease. It was held by the Division Bench consisting of Anantanarayanan, C.J. and Natesan, J., that the additional payment of the annual extra Mjnicipal tax of Rs. 1,212 agreed to subsequent to the demise cannot be deemed to be part of the rent for two reasons: (1) that the additional payment cannot be said to be consideration for the right of enjoyment of the premises; and (2) that as the original tenancy was by a registered instrument, it is not open to the tenant during the currency of the tenancy to plead any variation of rent which is not evidenced by another registered instrument. The actual decision is not relevant for our case; but the observations made by the learned Judges on the meaning of rent under the Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 and the scope of Section 30 of that Act are quite relevant for our purposes. The relevant observations are these:

17. Speaking for myself I am unable to brush aside the contention of the learned Counsel for the respondent as frivolous in nature or without any substance whatsoever. The Supreme Court in the case cited above has approved of the meaning of the word "rent" as defined by the King's Bench in Property Holding Co. Limited v. Clark L.R. (1948) 1 K.B. 630. The learned Judges who decided that English case have accepted the dictum of Younger, L.J., in Wilkes v. Goodwin L.R. (1923) 2 K.B. 105, Which is to the effect that the word 'rent' in the exception to Section 12(2) of the Rent Restrictions Act, 1920, meant not rent in the strict sense but the total payment under the instrument of letting and that the exception assumed the rent so called may include for example board, payment of which is not rent. The Rent Restriction Act of the year 1920, by Sections 12(2) which defined 'houses' "brought within the Act with reference to rent or rateable value by proviso (1), excluded from the Act "houses bona fide let at a rent which included payments in respect of board, attendance or use of furniture"; and the present Section 10 which was introduced by the second Act of 1923, provided that the inclusion of the use of furniture or of attendance shall not cause the house to be deemed to be bona fide let at a rent which includes either unless the amount forms a substantial part o f the whole 'rent'. Having regard to these provisions the learned Judges upheld the view of Younger, L.J., referred to above and held that the word 'rent' used in Section 12(1)(a) of the Act of 1920 must be given the same meaning as the word 'rent' found in Section 12(2) of the Act. Section 12(1)(a) of the Act of 1920 was enacted with a view to fix the rent; and the learned Judges have taken the view that the Legislature could not have intended that the word 'rent' used in Section 12(1)(a) was intended to have a different meaning from the word 'rent' used in the proviso to Section 12(2) of the Act.

19. Pursuing the same line of argument the learned Counsel contends that the Supreme Court ought to have held that the rent under the West Bengal Rent Control Act meant only the compensation payable for the use of the building, furniture and fitments and that the adoption by that Court of the wide meaning of the word 'rent' given by the English Courts was not warranted by the provisions of the Bengal Rent Control Act. 'Premises' has been defined by Section 2, Sub-clause 8 of the West Bengal Premises Rent Control Act, 1950, as any building or part of a building or any hut or part of a hut let separately and includes (a) the gardens, grounds and out-houses (if any) appertaining to such building or part of a building or hut or part of a hut, and {b) any furniture supplied or any fittings affixed by the landlord for the use of the tenant in such a building or part of a building or hut or part of a hut. According to the learned Counsel, there was no justification for adopting the so called popular meaning of the word 'rent' merely because the word is not specifically defined in the Act, when the West Bengal Rent Control legislation had chosen to define the premises in precise terms.

20. The decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Ramachandra's case (1969) 2 M.L.J. 8 : 82 L.W. 476 : I.L.R. (1969) 3 Mad. 584, cited above is also attacked by the learned Counsel on the same ground; and he further contends that, in view of the fact that the Legislature has specifically used the words "if monthly rent paid by him in respect of that building or part" in Section 30, there was totally no justification for interpreting the word 'rent' in the general popular sense of the word. According to the learned Counsel, keeping the definition of the word 'building' in Section 2(2) of the Madras Rent Control Act, 1960, in mind, the word 'rent' must be deemed to have been used only to indicate the compensation payable under the contract of tenancy for the use of the building and furniture only. The learned Counsel pleads that, in view of the language adopted in Section 30 of the Madras Rent Control Act, i960, the Division Bench was not justified in importing the definition of the term 'rent' as used in the English Rent Restrictions Act. He points out that the term 'rent' as defined in the English dictionaries means only the sum paid by the tenant for the use of land or houses and does not include the compensation payable for furniture, fittings and fixtures, services or board. At page 2536 of Stroud's Judicial Dictionary (Volume 3, III Edition) the following passage is found: "Probably it may be said that the primary meaning of rent is the sum certain, in gross, which a tenant pays his landlord for the right of occupying the demised premises". The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary on historical principles defines the term as a return, or payment made (in money or in kind) by a tenant to the owner or landlord at certain specified or customary times, for the use of lands or houses Webster's. Third New International Dictionary (1965) defines the word as a pecuniary sum agreed upon between a tenant and his landlord and paid at fixed intervals, by the tenant to the landlord for the use of land or its appendages (for a house).