NANAKRAM ETC. vs KUNDALRAI ETC.

The Supreme Court held that the Central Provinces and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949 does not mandate the Deputy Commissioner to eject a tenant for possession in violation of clause 22, thus making the lease binding between parties despite such inconsistency. The Court clarified that the lease is not void unless explicitly declared so by the Rent Control Order. Furthermore, the Notification exempting certain houses from the Rent Control provisions is prospective and does not operate retrospectively, thereby affirming the validity of the tenancy created before the Notification.