WAHID HUSSAIN Vs. NISAR AHMED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short question of law raised in this petition is whether an application seeking permission of the Competent Authority under the Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1956 for instituting any suit or proceedings for obtaining any decree or order for the eviction of a tenant from any premises in a slum area is competent when an order for eviction has already been obtained under section 14(l)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958.

(2.) The facts are not in dispute. The petitioner filed, on or about August 7, 1980, a petition for eviction against the respondent for recovery of possession of the premises No. 504, Gali Matia Mabal Jama Masjid, Delhi (for short called premises indispute) before the Rent Controller, Delhi on the ground under section 14(l)(e) read with section 25-B of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rent Act'). This petition was filed without obtaining the requisite permission from the Competent Authority under the Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Slum Act). The respondent-tenant sought leave to contest the eviction petition and filed an affidavit staling the grounds on which he sought .to contest the application for eviction. The application for leave to defend was dismissed by the Rent Controller. Delhi and consequently an order for the recovery of possession of the premises in dispute was passed in the order dated February 17, 1981. The respondent filed a revision petition under proviso to section 25-B(8) of the Rent Act against the said order. The revision petition was dismissed in limine by this Court on May 20, 1981. The respondent filed a Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court of India against the order dated May 20, 1981. It was registered as Special Leave Petition . No. 6324/ 1981 and was admitted on September 10, 1981. The dispossession of the respondent from the premises in dispute was stayed by the Supreme Court.

(3.) The petitioner claims that the respondent is liable to ejectment on grounds other than the proviso (e) to sub-section (1) of section 14 of the Rent Act. The petitioner moved an application dated February II, 1981 under section 19 of the Slum Act for obtaining previous permission to institute eviction proceedings against the respondent from the premises in dispute on various grounds. The respondent contested the application and made an independent application dated July 12, 1982 staling that the application under section 19 of the Slum Act was not maintainable. Shri C.B. Verma, Competent Authority (Slum) by his order dated July II, 1983 observed that the premission of the Competent Authority under section 19 should precede the institution of suits/proceedings, for obtaining any decree or order or eviction of the tenant, and should not follow it. He felt that this is a mandatory requirement and the Competent Authority could not ignore it. He found that the proceedings for eviction of the tenant had been instituted and eviction order had been obtained and thereafter the application under section 19 of the Slum Act was filed and thus it was held as not maintainable.