SAROJ AWASTHI Vs. KAILASH WATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (Oral) 1. This revision petition under Section 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act (for short the 'Act') is directed against the order dated 21.02.2012 of the Addl. Rent Controller (ARC), whereby the leave to defend application filed by the petitioner, who was the tenant in the eviction petition, was dismissed.

(2.) THE petitioner is a tenant in respect of the tenanted premises being 687, Pocket-1, Paschim Puri, Delhi (the tenanted premises). Her eviction was sought on the ground of bona fide requirement of the tenanted premises by the respondents. The petitioner filed leave to defend application, which came to be dismissed vide the impugned order. The same has been challenged in the instant revision petition.

(3.) WITH regard to ownership of the tenanted premises, the respondents' case was that Kailash Wati, the respondent no. 1 herein had purchased the property vide documents such as GPA, Agreement, Will etc. There was also no dispute that the rent was deposited by the petitioner under Section 27 of the Act in the name of her husband Rajender Ram (respondent No. 2 herein). It is nowhere alleged by the petitioner that anyone else, other than the respondents, had ever claimed rent from her. It is settled law that the absolute ownership of the tenanted premises was not required to be proved in the case of eviction under Section 14(1)(e) of the Act, and that tenant was not entitled to challenge the ownership of the landlord. There being no substance in this contention, the same is rejected.