NITIN ARORA Vs. UMESH KUMAR TREHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Petition has been filed by the Petitioner/tenant impugning the order dtd. 20/2/2018 [hereinafter referred to as 'Impugned Order"] passed by learned ACJ-cum-CCJ-cum-ARC (East), Karkardooma Courts, Delhi with respect to the premises i.e., Shop No. 7 at ground floor and part of property bearing No.13/82, Geeta Colony, Delhi-110031 [hereinafter referred to as 'demised premises"] wherein the Application for Leave to Defend/Contest filed by the Petitioner/tenant was dismissed and an Eviction Order was passed.

(2.) Learned Counsel who appears on behalf of the Petitioner/tenant seeks to rely upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the matter Mitter Sen Jain v. Shakuntala Devi, reported as (2000) 9 SCC 720 to submit that in the event a notification is not issued under the proviso to Sec. 1(2) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 [hereinafter referred to as 'Act"] making an area within the jurisdiction of the First Schedule of the Act, the Impugned order cannot be passed.

(3.) Learned Counsel who appears on behalf of Respondent/landlord fairly submits that upon examination of the matter, they have found that the notification does not apply to the area where the demised premises is located, i.e., Geeta Colony. Hence, in these circumstances the Impugned Order must be set aside by this Court.