VARDESH CHANDER CHANNA Vs. PREM NATH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal is -on behalf of the landlord under Sec. 39 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter 2 called 'the Act') is directed against an order dated 19th September, 1977 of the nt Control Tribunal, Delhi reversing the judgment and order of eviction against the appellants passed by the Additional Controller on 31st July, 1972 and finally dismissing the eviction application. Behari Lal, predecessor of the respondents, was a tenant on the first floor and the Barsati floor of property No. 11320/1 Plot No. 14 -A/41, Western Extension Area, Karol Bagh, New Delhi under the appellant. He died in 1962 leaving behind his widow Smt. Durga Devi, five sons and three daughters. Smt. Durga Devi died on 29th June, 1967 leaving behind the respondents as her heirs and legal representatives. The respondents thus 'became tenants being heirs of Behari Lal and Smt. Durga Devi under the appellant. After the death of Behari Lal, his widow

(2.) Smt. Durga Devi built a property on Plot No 14 -A/47, Western Extension Area. Karol Bagh, New Delhi some time in 1965 or 1966 and acquired vacant possession thereof. As already stated, she died on 29th June, 1967 and Therefore the said property was inherited by the respondents as her heirs. The present eviction application was filed, on 14th February, 1968 claiming eviction of the respondents under Sec. 14(l)(h) of the Act The appellant alleges that Smt. Durga Devi occupied a newly built house for residential purposes during her lifetime and that after her death the respondents being owners of the same acquired vacant possession of the said property and as such the respondents are liable to eviction. The appellant further alleges that respondents 1, 3, 6 and 8 have also got their separate accommodation for their residence. The respondents setup a Will dated 10th December 1966 alleging that the property built by their mother devolved upon Ravinder

(3.) Kumar, Rajinder Kumar and Smt. Santosh, respondents 4, 5 and 7 respectively, that their mother disinherited all other respondents from the said property. The other respondents plead that they have not acquired the vacant possession of any portion of property built by their mother. The validity of the eviction notice is also denied. The Additional Controller, as already stated, by his judgment dated 31st July, 1972 passed an order of eviction against the respondents holding that the Will set up by the respondents was not a genuine Will, that the respondents acquired vacant possession of the property at Plot No. 14 -A/47 Western Extension Area, Karol Bagh, New Delhi and that valid notice of eviction was served upon the respondents. Prem Nath and Pran Nath respondents filed an appeal challenging the eviction order dated 31st July, 1972 before the Rent Control Tribunal. The Tribunal accepted the appeal holding that the eviction notice was not validly served as It was served on some of the heirs of Behari Lal and not upon all. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the eviction application and hence this second appeal.