KHALIL KHAN Vs. AMIRUDDIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE three petitions had been disposed of by a common order dated 14.01.2010. The applications filed by the three tenants i.e. Khalil Khan, Nasir Ali and Nabi Ahmed seeking leave to defend had been declined; the eviction petition filed by the landlord Amiruddin seeking relief of possession qua the suit premises had been decreed.

(2.) RECORD shows that Amiruddin is the owner and the landlord of three portions of three premises which had been tenanted out to Khalil Khan, Nasir Ali and Nabi Ahmed. Nabi Ahmed had been tenanted out a portion of property bearing No. E-29, House No. 144/10, Khureji Khas, Delhi -51; Nabi Ali was a tenant in a portion of property bearing No. E- 30 and Khalil Khan was a tenant in a portion of property bearing No. E- 31 of the aforenoted suit property. Each portion comprised of one room, kitchen, latrine and open space on the ground floor of the premises bearing Nos. 144/10, 144/13 and 144/15, Khureji Khas, Delhi-51. The rate of rent was Rs. 1,000/-, Rs. 1,200/- and Rs. 850/- respectively which was exclusive of water and electricity charges.

(3.) ARGUMENTS have been refuted on this point. It is submitted that in view of the judgment of Prithipal Singh vs. Stapal Singh reported in (2010) 2 SCC 15, the provisions of the Code are inapplicable to the summary procedure as contained in Section 25B of the DRCA and Rule 23 of the DRCA being inapplicable, the present applications filed under the provisions of the Code cannot be permitted to be taken on record; further submission being that even otherwise these documents are not authentic and would in no manner throw light upon the controversy in question.