CHAMAN LAL MARWAH Vs. NAZIR UL ISLAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present revision petition has been filed challenging the impugned order/judgment dtd. 25/4/2022, passed by the Rent Control Tribunal, Central District, Tis Hazari in RCT No.18/2019 titled as Chaman Lal Marwah vs. Nazir-Ul-Islam and Ors.

(2.) Learned Rent Control Tribunal vide impugned order, dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner/objector against the order dtd. 29/1/2019 of the learned Additional Rent Controller. Learned Additional Rent Controller had dismissed the objections filed by the petitioner/objector in the proceedings for execution of the eviction under the Delhi Rent Control Act. The present case has a chequered history. An eviction petition was filed by the present respondents/landlord against their tenant Smt. Urmila Devi. The eviction petition was allowed by the learned Additional Rent Controller on 18/3/2011. During the execution proceedings, the petitioner filed the objections claiming that he was in possession of the premises in dispute since the year 2004. The objections were dismissed by the learned Executing Court vide order dtd. 3/3/2016. The petitioner/objector pleaded that subsequently the present respondent No.4 Sh. Mohd. Tayyab executed a lease deed of the premises in favour of the petitioner/objector on 10/10/2018 for a period of 29 years from 1/3/2019 to 28/2/2038 at a monthly rent of Rs.500.00. By virtue of this lease deed, the plea of the petitioner is that he became a lawful tenant in the premises and cannot be evicted. However, the objections were again dismissed by the learned Additional Rent Controller. It was inter alia held that the lease deed dtd. 10/10/2018 relied upon by the petitioner/objector cannot be looked into as it is an unregistered and unstamped document. Learned Rent Control Tribunal also found the document to be a suspicious document.

(3.) Petitioner had relied upon the statement of respondent No.4 recorded under Order X CPC wherein the respondent No.4 proved on record certain documents including the lease deed dtd. 10/10/2018 so as to buttress his claim that he is in lawful possession of the subject premises as a tenant and therefore cannot be evicted pursuant to the eviction order passed against Smt. Urmila Devi. Plea of the petitioner is that he is in possession of the subject property since the year 2004.