TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (8) TMI 1455
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....12 (2) of U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 [Hereinafter referred to as the "Act"]. It may be stated that during the pendency of the present appeal, Subhash Chand, another partner, who was allowed to enter into partnership with Pradeep Kumar by the District Magistrate also died on 25.6.2014. 2. The legal heirs of Pradeep Kumar and Subhash Chand were served with notice in the Special Leave Petition which led to the present Civil Appeal. An application was filed by the appellant to implead the legal heirs of Subhash Chand namely, Amit Goyal son of late Shri Subhash Chand and Smt. Swati Goyal daughter of Shri Subhash Chand. Notice of the said I.A. Nos. 23917, 23920 and 23921 of 2019 was ordered to be issued on 26.02.2020. As per the office report, notice was issued to the proposed legal heirs of the deceased Respondent No.4. The service was effected on the proposed legal heirs as per tracking report of the postal authorities. It is thereafter, on 28.07.2021, the application for substitution of the legal heirs of Respondent No. 4 was allowed. But none has put an appearance on behalf of the legal heirs of Respondent No.4. 3. Brief facts lead....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-Subject to contract between the partners a firm is dissolved,- (a) xxx xxx xxx (b) xxx xxx xxx (c) by the death of a partner (d) xxx xxx xxx" 5. Such review was dismissed vide order impugned in the present appeal on the ground that the petitioners have entirely set up a new case and the grounds urged are different from that of the writ petition. As on record, both the partners, i.e. Pradeep Kumar and Subhash Chand had died on 21.05.2004 and 25.06.2014, respectively. Hence, now the argument is that in terms of Section 42(c), the partnership stands dissolved by law. There is no clause in the partnership deed which permits the legal heirs of the deceased partners to continue with the partnership firm. Therefore, by operation of law, the partnership has come to an end. 6. Though learned counsel for the appellant raised an argument that approval of the District Magistrate, an Executive Authority, to seek permission to sublet or admit a partner was against the principle of separation of powers between the executive and judicial or quasijudicial functions, however we need not examine the said question in the present appeal. 7. The relevant pro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction 12(2), shall not be allotted that or any other non-residential building for a period of two years from the date of such eviction or deemed cessation, as the case may be: Provided that- (a) if the District Magistrate is satisfied in a case referred to in Section 12(2) that the admission of partner or new partner is bona fide transaction and not a mere cover for sub-letting, he shall, if any application had been made in that behalf before the admission of such partner or new partner, allot the non-residential building in question afresh to the newly constituted or re-constituted firm. (b) ........................................" 9. The learned Counsel for the appellants relied upon the judgment of this Court in Kunhayammed and Others v. State of Kerala and Another [(2000) 6 SCC 359] that the summary dismissal of the special leave petition does not bar the remedy of review as the same is permissible under law. In Khoday Distilleries Ltd. v. Sri Mahadeshwara Sahakara Sakkare Karkhane Ltd. [(2019) 4 SCC 376], this Court re-iterated the principles of law as under: "26.2 xxx xxx (iv) An order refusing special leave to appeal may be a ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....deration. The High Court however failed to take into consideration death of one of the partners leading to deemed vacation of the premises. The appellant relied upon the judgment of this Court in Pasupuleti Venkateswarlu v. The Motor & General Traders [(1975) 1 SCC 770] wherein it has been held as under: 4. We feel the submissions devoid of substance. First about the jurisdiction and propriety vis-à-vis circumstances which come into being subsequent to the commencement of the proceedings. It is basic to our processual jurisprudence that the right to relief must be judged to exist as on the date a suitor institutes the legal proceeding. Equally clear is the principle that procedure is the handmaid and not the mistress of the judicial process. If a fact, arising after the lis has come to court and has a fundamental impact on the right to relief or the manner of moulding it, is brought diligently to the notice of the tribunal, it cannot blink at it or be blind to events which stultify or render inept the decretal remedy. Equity justifies bending the rules of procedure, where no specific provision or fairplay is not violated, with a view to promote substantial justice- ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e not stopped only at the stage of Section 12(2) but have further provided in Section 25, Explanation (i) another legal fiction saying that where the tenant ceases to occupy the building within the meaning of sub-section (2) of Section 12 "he shall be deemed to have sub-let that building or part". In view of the three deeming clauses introduced in sub-section (2) of Section 12, sub-section (4) of Section 12 and Explanation (i) to Section 25, no scope has been left for the courts to examine and consider the facts and circumstances of any particular case, as to what was the object of admitting a person who is not the member of the family, as partner and as to whether, in fact, the premises or part thereof have been sub-let to such person. xxx xxx xxx 25. The framers of the Act have clearly expressed their intention in Sections 12, 20 and 25 while protecting the tenant from eviction except on the grounds mentioned in Section 20, that after the death of the original tenant his heirs will be deemed to be holding the premises as joint tenants and for any breach committed by any of such joint tenants, all the heirs of the original tenant have to suffer. They cannot take ....