SURINDER KUMAR Vs. PREM KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will dispose of two revision petitions, (1) No. 157 of 1980, and (2) No. 158 of 1980.

(2.) The landlord filed a petition under s. 25B of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter the Act) against the tenant for his eviction on 31.7.1979. The Controller directed that the summons on the respondent tenant be served in the Form given in the Schedule III to the Act. The summons was, according to the tenant, served on him on 16.10.1979; and according to the landlord, on October 6, 1979. One more summons as required by law was sent under the registered cover. The cover bears the endorsement "not met" on October 4,5,6,8 and 10. No. A.D. card was received back but the tenant maintained that he got the registered cover on 12.10.1979.

(3.) The tenant appeared on 24.10.1979. and moved an application for leave to defend the petition Reply was filed on 14.11.79. According to the summons the tenant is required to appear within fifteen days of the service of the summons and to obtain the leave of the Controller to contest the application upon the warning that in default, the applicant is entitled at any time after the expiry of the said period of 15 days to obtain an order for eviction. The applicant contended that the summons was in fact served on 6.10.79, but the tenant filed his application for leave to defend on October 24.10.1979, which he could not do and the applicant was entitled to an order of eviction. The tenant contended in the first instance that the summons was received by him on October 16. At any rate, the registered cover was received by him on October 12, and, therefore, his application for leave was within time.