KULDIP MEHTA Vs. KAPUR AND CO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri Kuldip Mehta petitioner herein filed an eviction petition under Section 14(1)(e) read with Section 25 B of the Delhi Rent Control Act with respect to premises No. M-140 Greater Kailash-I, New Delhi, in April, 1987 (being E-132/87) on the ground of personal bonafide requirement. An application seeking leave to defend was filed by the respondents and without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner with the consent of the Counsel for petitioner leave to contest was granted by the Addl. Rent Controller on 2710.1987. Since then the eviction petition is pending for disposal.

(2.) In this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has alleged he has no proper place to live and per force he has to reside along with his wife in a tent house on the terrace of his house and are at the mercy of the heat, the rain and the winter. The failure of the Addl. Rent Controller to piss orders for eviction and take subsequent circumstances into consideration and otherwise the manner in which the petition is proceeding is not only failure of jurisdiction and is wrong exercise of Jurisdiction which is denying the petitioner the benefit of his property and conferring upon the respondent unreserved bounty. He prayed that the order dated 27.10.1987 granting leave to defend may be revoked and order for forthwith eviction be passed.

(3.) According to the learned Counsel for the petitioner It is neither the scheme of the Rent Act nor the purpose thereof that the house owner should be forced to live In a tenant while the mutli-millioner person is allowed to oppress the house owner by claiming protections to be tenant under the Rent laws.