Supreme Court: Tenancy will not be determined even after destruction of suit building

It has been further opined that once a tenancy is created  in  respect

of a building standing on the land it is the building  and  the  land  which

are both components of the subject-matter of demise and the  destruction  of

the building alone does not determine the tenancy when  the  land  which  is

the site of the building continues to exist.   This  interpretation,  as  we

find, is in accord with Section 108 of the Act.

REPORTABLE

                        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                         CIVIL APPEAL NO.  127  OF 2007

M/S SHAHA RATANSI KHIMJI & SONS   Vs PROPOSED KUMBHAR SONS HOTEL P. LTD. & ORS.   

   Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
R.M. Lodha, C.J.I., S.J. Mukhopadhaya and Dipak Misra, JJ.

P. Ltd. (10.07.2014 - SC) : MANU/SC/0602/2014

Dated: JULY 10, 2014.

Citation: AIR 2014 SC 2895

Print Page

Supreme Court: Destruction of tenanted building will not determine tenancy

 It has been further opined that once a tenancy is created in respect of a building standing on the land it is the building and the land which are both components of the subject-matter of demise and the destruction of the building alone does not determine the tenancy when the land which is the site of the building continues to exist. This interpretation, as we find, is in accord with Section 108 of the Act. It is reflectible that in Vannattankandy Ibrayi'scase, the two-Judge Bench observed that the rights stand extinguished as on the distinction of the demise, for there is destruction of the superstructure and in its non-existence there is no subject matter. Thus, the land has been kept out of the concept of subject matter. In our considered opinion, the Court in the said case failed to appreciate that there are two categories of subject-matters, combined in a singular capsule, which is the essence of provision under the Transfer of Property Act and not restricted to a singular one, that is, the superstructure. In T. Lakshmipathi (supra) the Court took note of the fact that the land and superstructure standing on it as a singular component for the purpose of tenancy. It is in tune with the statutory provision. Therefore, we agree with the proposition stated therein to the affect that "in the event of the tenancy having been created in respect of a building standing on the land, it is the building and the land which are both components of the subject-matter of demise and the destruction of the building alone does not determine the tenancy when the land which was the site of the building continues to exist". On the touchstone of this analysis, we respectfully opine that the decision rendered in Vannattankandy Ibrayi (supra) does not correctly lay down the law and it is, accordingly, overruled.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal No. 127 of 2007

Decided On: 10.07.2014

Shaha Ratansi Khimji and Sons

Vs. Proposed Kumbhar Sons Hotel P. Ltd.

Respondent: Proposed Kumbhar Sons Hotel P. Ltd.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:R.M. Lodha, C.J.I., Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya and Dipak Misra, JJ.

Print Page