VEENA CHAWALA MS Vs. RAM PYARI MATTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is a divorced wife of the tenant Mr Sudesh Kumar. The notice of termination of tenancy for non-payment of rent was issued to the tenant and a suit for ejectment was also laid against him. The appellant has paid the rent on behalf of the divorced husband and she deposited the arrears staling that she is a tenant under Section 2 (/) of the Delhi Rent Control Act. All the courts below have concurrently found against the appellant that she is not atenant. The S. A. O. No. 184 of 1981 was dismissed by the High court on 20/07/1981. Thus this appeal by special leave.

(2.) Shri T. S. Arora, the learned counsel for the appellant contended that the a divorce results in legal death of the other spouse and therefore Section 2 (l) is attracted. We find no substance in the contention. Two conditions precedent, necessary for application of Section 2 (7, are that there should be a mortal death of the tenant and the legal representatives residing under the same roof must be financially dependant on the deceased tenant. Therefore, the appellant who was divorced wife is not entitled to the benefit of Section 2 (/). In this case, Mr Sudesh Kumar who is fortunately still alive, hence the appellant cannot claim any right under her divorced husband, who was a tenant. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs.