LRs Of Deceased Tenant Have A Right To Re-Entry In The Building Reconstructed After Demolition : Allahabad HC [Read Order]

The question which arose before the court was whether the legal representatives of the deceased tenant were entitled to get themselves substituted to pursue the application moved by the "original tenant", seeking re-entry under Section 24(2) of the Act.

The original tenant had been evicted from the building under Section 21(1)(b) of the Act for the reconstruction of dilapidated structure. An application for re-entry was filed by the original tenant pending which he died and his legal representatives sought to be substituted in the proceedings. The Petitioner claimed that the scheme of the right of re-entry being personal to the original tenant would fade away with his demise. The Act does not contemplate that the legal representatives of the original tenant would be allowed to continue to pursue the application for re-entry under Section 24(2), he added.

The Respondents on the other hand contended that the words "original tenant" would include the legal representatives in view of the definition of "tenant" under Section 3(a) read with Sections 2(11) and 146 of CPC. They also stated that the Act contemplates the rights of tenants and their heirs in as much as despite the inapplicability of the Act to a newly constructed buildings, the legislature has conferred a right upon the tenant to have the newly constructed building allotted to him, considering the hardship which is implied due to eviction under Section 21(1)(b).

After due consideration of various statutory provisions and precedents put forth him, Justice Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava held that in view of Gian Devi Anand v. Jeevan Kumar & Ors., (1985) 2 SCC 683, the rule of heritability extends to statutory tenancy of commercial premises as much as to residential premises. Any person who represents the tenancy or intermeddles would be a legal representative and could be substituted in place of the deceased-tenant, he said.

He drew inference from the case of Anwar Hasan Khan v. Mohd. Shafi & Ors., (2001) 8 SCC 540, and held that the provisions contained under Section 34(4) of the Act which provide for substitution of the legal representatives of the deceased-tenant in proceedings for eviction would be applicable to proceedings under Section 24(2) of the Act. In the aforementioned judgment the cardinal principle of construction of a statute by reading it as a whole and construing one provision with reference to the provisions so as to make the provision consistent with the object of the Act was emphasized. Consequently, the Petitioners arguments were dismissed.

The Petitioner was represented by Advocate by Rahul Sahai and the Respondent by Advocate Kshitij Shailendra

Click here to download the Order