OM PRAKASH SHARMA Vs. RAJ RANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RC. Rev. 37/2004 is directed against the judgment of the Additional Rent Controller, Delhi (for short "the Controller") in E 295/2003, whereby the learned Controller vide its judgment dated 28th April, 2004, has dismissed the petition of the petitioner herein under Section 14(1)(e) read with Section 25(B) of the Delhi Rent Control Act.

(2.) The brief facts of the case, as has been noted by the learned Controller, are as under: "Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of aforesaid petition are that petitioner had filed a petition aforesaid against the respondent on 4.12.2002. Summons were sent to the respondent as per Schedule III of D.R.C. Act. Thereafter, leave to defend application was filed. The said leave to defend application of the respondent was dismissed and an eviction of orders was passed against the respondent vide order dated 26.4.2003 passed by then learned Addl. Rent Controller, Ms. Nivedita Anil Sharma. Thereafter, the respondent went in appeal before the Hon'ble High Court and vide order dated 16.10.2003 Hon'ble High Court granted leave to contest the petition to the respondent and also observed that Trial Court shall endeavour to dispose of the matter within six months from the date of communication of the order. Accordingly, the matter was remanded back and was marked to this Court by the learned Rent Controller."

(3.) It is contended by Counsel for the petitioner that the High Court while remanding the matter vide order dated 16th October, 2003, had specifically directed the Controller that the only question requiring his attention and adjudication was regarding the extent of alternative, suitable accommodation available with the landlord and his son. The Controller is strictly bound by this direction and could not have gone behind the findings in the earlier order.