(1.) This petition impugns an order dated 10.9.2013 whereby the petitioner/plaintiff's application under Order 12 Rule 6 read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure was rejected. The petitioner had filed a suit seeking decree of possession in their favour against the respondent in respect of the premises in dispute. The application sought decree on the basis of admissions made by the respondent/defendant in his written statement. The petitioner/plaintiff is a landlord of property No. G-27/4, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi. Its ground floor comprising two bed rooms with attached bathroom, kitchen, drawing room and portion of the first floor comprising the drying room, one small room and one bathroom were le out to the defendant at the rate of Rs.25,000/- per month excluding water and all other charges. The tenancy was for a period of 22 months, and rent agreement was executed before the sub-Registrar on 2.4.2009. As per the terms of the agreement, the rent was to be enhanced by 10% after expiry of 11 months, therefore the last rent paid was Rs.27,500/- excluding all other charges. After the expiry of tenure of the lease, it was extended for a further period of seven months on the defendant/tenant's assurance that he would, in any case, hand over the possession of the premises to the plaintiff by 31.1.2012. However, in the interim, the plaintiff issued notice to the tenant on 29.6.2011 followed by a reminder on 11.1.2012 asking them to vacate the premises. But there was no compliance of the plaintiff's request therefore the suit was filed to seek possession as well as damages and mesne profits for the use and occupation. The defendant had admitted the enhanced rent of Rs.27.500/- from 1.7.2011 and that the tenancy period had been extended by another seven months by the plaintiff.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon three judgments;
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner also relied upon a judgment of this Court in Sunil Kapoor vs. Himmat Singh & Ors., 2010 167 DLT 806 which held: