Authority: Supreme Court of India, Civil Appellate Jurisdiction
Order Date: 09 July 2026
Case Overview
- Parties: Appellant – British Motor Car Company (1939) Ltd (the landlord); Respondents – Hindustan Commercial Bank Ltd (merged into Punjab National Bank) and Punjab National Bank (the tenant).
- Lease Details: In 1947 the appellant let out 2,443.75 sq. ft. on the ground floor and 1,150.25 sq. ft. on the mezzanine of Pratap Building N‑Block, Connaught Circus, New Delhi, for a monthly rent of Rs.585, for non‑residential purposes.
- Amalgamation: On 18 December 1986 the Government of India issued a Gazette Notification under Section 45(7) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, effecting the amalgamation of Hindustan Commercial Bank (HCB) with Punjab National Bank (PNB) effective 19 December 1986. All rights and liabilities of HCB, including tenancy rights, vested in PNB.
- Eviction Petition: The appellant filed Eviction Petition E‑161/1987 under Section 14(1)(b) r/w Section 14(1)(j) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, alleging unauthorised sub‑letting/assignment by PNB without the landlord’s written consent.
- Additional Rent Controller (03 Nov 1995) dismissed the petition, holding the amalgamation scheme was binding on the tenant and did not constitute a sub‑letting.
- Additional Rent Control Tribunal (21 May 2001, RCA No. 22/2000) reversed that view and passed a decree of eviction against the respondents.
- High Court of Delhi (12 Mar 2012, CM (M) No. 485 of 2001) set aside the tribunal’s eviction decree, relying on Asha Rohtagi v. Erstwhile New Bank of India and treating the amalgamation as an involuntary act exempting the tenant from Section 14(1)(b).
- The appellant appealed to the Supreme Court, raising that Section 14(1)(b) is wide‑ranging and applies irrespective of whether the transfer of possession is voluntary or involuntary.
Final Outcome
- The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, held that the amalgamation under Section 45 of the Banking Regulation Act does not shield the tenant from eviction under Section 14(1)(b) of the Delhi Rent Control Act.
- The High Court judgment dated 12 Mar 2012 is set aside.
- The eviction decree dated 21 May 2001 passed by the Additional Rent Control Tribunal is restored.
- Respondents are directed to deliver peaceful and vacant possession of the premises to the appellant by 31 January 2027.
- Respondents must furnish an undertaking to this effect within four weeks of the judgment.
- Respondents shall continue to pay rent on the contractual terms fixed by the lower courts; failure to do so permits the appellant to take possession in accordance with law.
- All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
Topics: Eviction, Banking Amalgamation