RAJINDER PARSAD SINGHAL Vs. SHARDA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking the setting aside of the impugned order dated 07.01.2019 of the Rent Control Tribunal, THC in RCT No.33/2017 whereby the said appeal of the petitioner and two applications under Order 41 Rule 27 of the CPC filed by the petitioner were dismissed whilst upholding the impugned judgment of the learned trial Court dated 30.03.2017 i.e. the Pilot Court (Central District), THC in Eviction Petition No.E-51/2017 whereby the eviction petition filed by the landlady i.e. the respondent to the present petition, Smt. Sharda Devi against the present petitioner Rajender Prasad Singhal under Section 14 (1) (b) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 as amended (hereinafter referred to as 'The Act')was allowed and the present petitioner was directed to be evicted from the tenanted premises comprising one shop in property bearing no.B-1437, Shastri Nagar, New Delhi-110052, it having been held that the landlady i.e. the petitioner of the eviction petition has successfully established that the respondent herein had sublet, assigned and parted with possession of the tenanted premises to Shri Raj Kumar and his son Shri Arpit Singhal.

(2.) At the outset, it is essential to observe that the petitioner herein has already availed of the remedy of an appeal to the Rent Control Tribunal and w.e.f. 01.12.1988, the remedy of the second appeal to this Court on a question of law has since been deleted and even the appeal under Section 38 of the DRC Act to the Rent Control Tribunal can be preferred only on a question of law.

(3.) The respondent was present on 08.02.2019 as the Caveator of Caveat 121/2019 when the matter had been taken up for consideration and was heard and the caveat discharged. Arguments have thus been addressed on behalf of either side.