N K RUSTOGI Vs. K S GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition, the petitioner, a tenant has raised a very important and interesting point pertaining td the interpretation of the word "built a residence" appearing under Section 14(1) (hh) of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter called as "the Act"). The petitioner was allotted a flat by the Delhi Development Authority (hereinafter called the 'DDA') under its Self Financing Scheme (hereinafter called as "SFS"). The question for consideration is whether this flat allotted by the DDA would amount to building a resi dence by the petitioner? Can he seek the exemption stipulated under Section 14(1) (hh) of the Act?

(2.) In order to appreciate the arguments, in brief the facts relevant and admitted for determination of this issue are that petitioner was inducted as tenant on the ground floor premises bearing No.A-75, Ashok Vihar Phase III Delhi vide agreement dated 15th June, 1978 for residential purposes on monthly rent of Rs.l200.00 . Respondent berein is the landlord. Petitioner-tenant has acquired vacant possession of a flat allotted by DDA bearing No. 1671(0/1, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi. Since tenant acquired vacant possession of a residential flat of his own, therefore, the landlord filed the eviction petition under Section 14(1) (h)- of the Act. Petitioner took the objection before the trial court that the premises allotted to him by DDA under SFS amounts to construction of the flat by him through the agency of the DDA under the 5th SFS. Hence exempted from the eviction for 10 years as stipulated in Clause (hh) of Section 14(1) of the Act. Section 14(1) (h) of the Act as stood prior to its amendment of 1988 reads as under:- Section 14(1) Qi) "that the tenant has, whether before or after the commencement of this Act, built, acquired vacant possession of, or been allotted a residence."

(3.) But after the amendment of 1988 the word "built" has been omitted from Clause (h) and a new clause has been inserted as (hh) in the Act which reads as under.' Section 14(1) (hh)