In Re - An Appeal by Mohamed Ibrahim; Ex Parte - Gulam Mustafa Litt (Civil Appeal No. 19 of 1953)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
The court held that a statutory tenant has only a purely personal right to occupy premises, which cannot be transmitted by will or pass to an administrator on intestacy. The administrator of a deceased statutory tenant has no right to be made a party to an appeal because the cause of action does not survive the tenant's death. The widow of a statutory tenant, if residing with him at death, does not derive title by succession but becomes a statutory tenant by operation of law under the Ordinance.
Outcome
Administrator's application to be made a party to the appeal refused
Facts
Mohamed Ibrahim was the contractual tenant of the respondent landlord. The contractual tenancy was terminated by notice to quit, and Ibrahim continued to occupy as a statutory tenant under the Increase of Rent (Restriction) Ordinance, 1949. The landlord applied to the Central Rent Control Board for possession, which made an absolute order for possession effective 31 March 1953. Ibrahim appealed to the Supreme Court and obtained a stay of execution pending appeal. Before the appeal could be heard, Ibrahim died intestate on 2 December 1954. His son obtained letters of administration on 21 May 1955 and applied on 27 May 1955 to be made a party to the appeal under Order 23 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Issues
- Whether the cause of action survived the death of a statutory tenant such that an administrator could be made a party to the appeal.
- Whether a statutory tenant's right to occupy premises is a personal right that does not pass to an administrator on intestacy.
- Whether the widow of a deceased statutory tenant has a statutory right to continue with an appeal.
- What is the effect of an absolute order for possession by the Rent Control Board on the rights of a statutory tenant and his widow.
Orders
- Application dismissed.
- Costs awarded against the applicant in his capacity as administrator.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (9)
- Increase of Rent (Restriction) Ordinance, 1949 s.2(1)
- Increase of Rent (Restriction) Ordinance, 1949 s.5
- Increase of Rent (Restriction) Ordinance, 1949 s.16
- Civil Procedure (Revised) Rules, 1948 Order 23 rule 1
- Civil Procedure (Revised) Rules, 1948 Order 23 rule 3
- Civil Procedure (Revised) Rules, 1948 Order 23 rule 10
- Increase of Rent and Mortgage Interest (Restrictions) Act, 1920 s.12
- Indian Limitation Act, 1877 Article 175(a)
- Court of Probate Act, 1858 s.19
Cases cited (12)
- John Lovibond & Sons Ltd v Vincent (1929) 1 KB 687
- Collis v Flower (1921) 1 KB 409
- Parkinson v Noel (1923) 1 KB 117
- Mellows v Low (1923) 1 KB 522
- Skinner v Geary (1931) 2 KB 562
- Keeves v Dean (1924) 1 KB 685
- Roe v Russell (1928) 2 KB 117
- Salter v Lask (1925) 1 KB 584
- Brock v Wollams (1949) 1 All ER 715
- Haskins v Lewis (1931) 2 KB 1
- American Economic Laundry Ltd v Little (1951) 1 KB 400
- Brown v Draper (1944) KB 309
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.