NAND RAM Vs. MOHD NASEEM AHMAD @ NASEEM AHMAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugns the concurrent judgments; of the executing court dated 26.5.2007 and the first appellate court dated 07.2.2011; by which both the courts below have allowed the objections of the objector/respondent and has dismissed the execution petition seeking execution of the ex parte judgment and decree dated 04.12.2003 obtained by the petitioner/landlord against one alleged tenant Islamuddin.

(2.) At the outset, I must note that there was a provision of second appeal being Section 39 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), but this provision was repealed by the Act 57 of 1988, and therefore no second appeal lies. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India therefore cannot be substituted for a second appeal. The scope of hearing of this petition is therefore extremely limited.

(3.) Both the courts below have allowed the objections on the ground that the respondent/objector was in possession of the suit/tenanted premises from around 18 years (since 1986) prior to passing of the exparte judgment and decree dated 4.12.2003 and the suit for permanent injunction that was filed by the respondent/objector i.e on 21.9.2002 against the petitioner/landlord for injunction against dispossession without due process of law, and in those proceedings the petitioner/landlord concealed the aspect with respect to filing of the eviction petition on the ground of subletting. Both the courts below have held that the respondent/objector was a tenant of the suit property and not Sh. Islamuddin, inasmuch as the mother of the decree holder in 1986 had inducted the respondent/objector as a tenant.