KAPOOR FABRICS Vs. KAMAL MARWAHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The main argument on behalf of the appellant is that the judgment of this Court dated 28th October, 1992 interparties is not correct. By the said judgment, this Court had remitted the case to the Rent Control Tribunal for issue of a fresh notice to the Land & Development Officer to state the position clearly, as to whether the said office was contemplating any action of re-entry in face of continued misuser or whether they arc willing to condone it for all time to come. The relevant portion of the judgment is reproduced as under :

(2.) In terms of the demand order, the matter was taken up by the Rent Con Tribunal. Notice was issued to the L&DO. In response to the notice, Shri / Sehrawat, Deputy Land & Development Officer, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi ma( statement on oath as under : "Statement of Shri A.C. Sehrawat, Deputy Land & Development Officer, Nirr Bhawan, New Delhi on S.A. In answer to the question raised to the notice in terms of judgment da October 28, 1992 of Hon'ble High Court in this case, I am to confirm that L.&D.O. is not willing to condone the misuser in respect of property No 29, Defence Colony, New Delhi for all times to come. L.&D.O. issued a no dated 11.1.93 to the appellant-landlord. I have seen the copy of that not which bears my signatures. It is Ex. X-1. In view of the notice it is already mentioned therein that in the event of fail to comply with the notice i.e. to remedy the breeches within 30 days then action to re-enter/cancel the lease, would be taken. As per the notice, office of L.& D.O. contemplates re-entry in this case."

(3.) On the basis of the said statement, the Tribunal passed the impugned or dated 16th May, 1995. The Deputy Land & Development Officer who was examinee the Tribunal took a firm stand that the offici of the Land & Development Office not willing to condone the misuser in respect to the property in suit for all time come. He reiterated the notice of the L&DO issued by the L&DO to the landlady dated 11th January, 1993 in which the landlady had been called upon to stop misuser. To quote the said notice, "....required to remedy the breaches within days from the date of receipt of this notice and stop the misuser within the s period. In the event of your failure to comply with the above, action to re-enticancel the lease will be taken." This makes it clear that the Land & Development Officer was not prepared to condone the breaches for all times to come. In these circumstances, I do not find any error in the approach of the Rent Control Tribunal in its judgment dated 16th May, 1995.