OM PRAKASH Vs. BHAGWAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India what is contended for by the petitioner will create an odd situation. The petitioner submits that the appeal, which has been filed by the respondents against the order of the Rent Controller deferring to make an order under Section 15(1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, is not maintainable having been filed against a dead person. The odd situation, that will arise, is that the appeal before the Rent Control Tribunal is not maintainable and yet the order deferring the determination of the amount payable by the tenant under Section 15(1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act would not have been passed. There is a statutory requirement for passing of the order under Section 15(1) after hearing the parties

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner, who appears for the legal representatives of the deceased tenant, does not dispute, after perusing the provisions of Section 15(1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, that the power to defer does not exist.

(3.) On a plain reading of the provisions of Section 15(1), it appears to me that the Rent Controller cannot defer the determination of the amount payable. He can adjourn the hearing to enable himself to hear the parties but the matter cannot be deferred in a manner similar to stay in proceedings sine die.