SHASHI BHUSHAN LAL Vs. KANSHI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THERE was a Section 39 in Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred as to 'the Act') which provided for filing of a second appeal. Second appeal could be filed only on limited ground of there existing a substantial question of law. The provision of Section 39 has been repealed by Act 57 of 1988 w.e.f 1.12.1988. Once second appeal cannot lie, a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India cannot be filed as a substitute for a second appeal. These observations I am making because if scope of hearing of a second appeal is limited, then the scope of hearing a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is further limited, and also it is a discretionary jurisdiction to be exercised only when there is occasioned gross injustice.

(2.) IN the present case, both the courts below have arrived at a finding of fact with respect to the period from which the rent of Rs.525/ - per month is payable i.e. w.e.f 1.6.1998. The respective contentions and evidence both documentary and oral, has been considered by the courts below to give finding of fact of the rent being payable at Rs.525/ - per month w.e.f 1.6.1998. Also, correct reasons have been given for claiming the arrears of rent prior to three years of sending of the legal notice and only on non - compliance of which the limitation period commences for filing a petition under Section 14(1)(a) of the Act for non -payment of rent. It is also noted that no period of limitation is provided for filing a petition under the Act and to which aspect I may further note that in some Rent Control Act of certain States it has been held by the Supreme Court that limitation period will be of 12 years as the eviction petition is qua an immovable property. The relevant conclusions of the impugned judgment are as under: -

(3.) IN view of the above, there is no merit in the petition, and the same is therefore dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.