P P KALRA Vs. M V BHATNAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Order of Ms. Sharda Aggarwal, Rent Control Tribunal, Delhi passed on 18.8.1994, partly accepting the appeal of landlord respondent and thereby modifying the order passed by Shri Babu Lal, Additional Rent. Controller, Delhi on 2.7.1994 is under challenge in this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution.

(2.) The petitioner claiming himself to be a tenant under the respondent filed a petition under Section 45 of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) claiming restoration of essential amenities, namely, electricity, to the premises in question being a shop. It was alleged that,the landlord respondent had cut off the electric connection without just and sufficient cause. Thus, there was withholding of essential supply to the premises let out to the tenant. This withholding of essential supplies was alleged to be with a view to compel the tenant either to enhance the rent or to vacate the premises. Petitioner also prayed for ex parte interim order for restroation of electricity. On notice being issued, the respondent contested the petitioner's claim alleging that petitioner was a sub-tenant and proceedings for tenant's eviction were already pending. On the question of withdrawing of essential amenities the respondent alleged that original tenant, namely, C.L. Mehra had not paid electricity charges w.e.f. June 1980 and due to non payment of such arrears amounting to Rs. 18,620.00 electricity supply had been disconnected by DESU. Since the petitioner was an unauthorised occupier and electricity supply had been disconnected by DESU due to non payment of electricity bills, therefore, the petitioner was not entitled to any relief against the respondent.

(3.) The Controller, after hearing counsel for the parties, allowed the application for interim relief. It was observed that though there was a dispute as regards relationship of landlord and tenant yet it was not in dispute that the petitioner was in occupation of the premises. To the premises electricity supply was available, therefore, it being an essential amenity was liable to be restored. By making reference to a pending file of Eviction case No. E-25/1987 V.K. Bhatnagar v. C.L. Mehra & Others, the Controller observed that the stand taken by the respondent that electricity dues had not been paid since 1980 by the tenant was wholly untenable since in the said proceedings for eviction no grievance had been made to that effect. A prima facie case was held to have been made out by the petitioner for restoration of electricity. Accordingly a direction was made to the respondent to restore the same within a week.