KANCHAN KAPOOR & ORS Vs. SARWAN KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Review Petition No. 544/2014 (U/o 47 Rule 1 & 2 CPC, Section 114 CPC by respondent) & CM No. 20265/2014 (exemption)

(2.) The issue which was argued before this Court at the time of disposal of the Rent Control Revision Petition by the judgment dated 17.11.2014 was whether the respondent/review petitioner/alleged landlord was the owner of the tenanted premises so as to be entitled to file the eviction petition. Parties were heard at length as to whether the respondent in this Court was the owner and landlord of the property. Review petitioner/respondent claimed title on the ground that he was a servant of the owner Smt. Vidyawati and who had executed a Will dated 17.3.1988 in favour of the respondent.

(3.) The judgment dated 17.11.2014 specifically refers to Section 50 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') which states that questions as to title i.e questions as to ownership of a tenanted property are no doubt decided by the rent control authorities under the Act, however finality with respect to questions of title can be and only are decided by the civil courts. In the present case, in a civil suit between the parties, the civil court had held that the review petitioner/respondent was not the owner of the property. The detailed findings of the civil court running into about four pages have been reproduced in the impugned judgment dated 17.11.2014. The judgment of the civil court was dated 16.3.2011 and in the civil court proceedings/suit the issue of ownership was issue no.2, and this issue was decided by holding that the review petitioner/respondent was not the owner of the suit property. Para 5 of the judgment dated 17.11.2014 passed by this Court reproduced the verbatim findings of the civil court as regards the issue no.2 decided by the civil court.