J C MEHRA Vs. KUSUM GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One Pushpawati acquired the lessee-rights of plot No.50, Sukhdev Vihar, Near Okhla Bus Deport, New Delhi-110025. A small house was constructed on the said plot. The same was let out to the petitioner. The property was sold to the respondent on power of attorney sale basis on 12th August, 1993 for a consideration of Rs. 7,75,000/-. Customary set of documents were executed. Thereafter a formal conveyance deed was executed on 10th March,1995 in favour of the respondent. On 31st May, 1999, an eviction petition was filed by the respondent against the petitioner. The petitioner sought leave to contest. Leave to contest was rejected on 3rd November, 1999 and order for eviction was passed. The petitioner assailed the order in CR 449/2000, which was allowed and leave to contest was granted to the petitioner. The matter was remanded to the Controller. By order dated 18th February, 2003, the learned ARC ordered eviction. Six months time was granted to the petitioner for vacating the premises

(2.) The petitioner assails the order of learned ARC dated 18th February, 2003 on the ground that learned ARC failed to appreciate the provisions of sub-Section (6) of Section 14 of the Delhi Rent Control, Act. His sole plea is that sale by way of power of attorney in 1993 could not amount to handing over symbolic possession of the property. His further contention is that he did not attorn to the landlady. Rent was paid till 1996 to the erstwhile owner. He came to know about selling of the premises in question only 1995.

(3.) The main thrust of the petitioner is that 5 year period is to be calculated from the date when the conveyance deed was executed in favour of the respondent and not from the date when power of attorney sale was made. The property was thus acquired in 1995 and eviction petition was filed before the expiry of he 5 years period as envisaged in Section 14(6) of the Delhi Rent Control Act. The petition was thus premature.