SUDARSHANA RANI Vs. KAMLA BHUTANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Facts giving rise to this revision petition are that Smt. Sudarhan Rani Kapoor, petitioner, herein, filed an eviction petition against Smt. Kamla Bhutani, respondent herein, under Section 14(1)(e) read with Section 25B, of the Delhi Rent Control Act, as amended, on the ground that the premises are required bonafide by the landlady for her occupation as residence for herself and other members of her family.

(2.) Summons under Schedule III of the Delhi Rent Control Act were also issued in accordance with Section 25B(3)(a) of the Act, but the same were not personally served on the respondent as she was away to Calcutta. Her attorney who had received the summons, filed an application under Section 2SB(4) seeking leave to defend the eviction petition within the statutory period of fifteen days. That application was, however, dismissed by the Addl. Rent Controller vide order dated 18,3.1991 observing that the same should have been filed by the respondent herself. Admitting the averments made in the eviction petition to be correct, the Addl. Rent Controller passed an eviction order under Section 14(1)(e) of the Del hi Rent Control Act in favour of the petitioner and against the respondent on 18.1.1991. However, six months time was granted for vacating the said premises.

(3.) The respondent having come to know of the eviction order, filed an application on 1.2.91 under Section 25B(9) of the Delhi Rent Control Act read with Order 9 Rule 13 Civil Procedure Code and Section 151 Civil Procedure Code for recalling the eviction order dated 18.1.91 on the ground that she was never served with the summons issued under Section 2SB(3)(a). She was away to Calcutta and she had no personal knowledge of the eviction petition filed against her and as such question of filing an application seeking leave to defend by her personally could not have arisen. It was only on 29.1.91, when the respondent received a caveat under Section 148 Civil Procedure Code then she came to know that eviction order has been passed against her on (8.1.1991. She immediately moved an application supported by an affidavit for recalling the order passed against her and seeking leave to defend the eviction petition.