JAI PRAKASH GUPTA Vs. SURAIYA BEGUM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is directed against the order of the Additional District Judge, Delhi in Suit No.197/2003 whereby the learned Judge vide order dated 20.1.2004 has disposed of Issues No.4 and 5 holding that the premises in question does not fall within the definition of ?premises ? as defined under Section 2(i) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 and, therefore, the Court has jurisdiction to try the suit. CM(M) 317/2004 (page 1 of 5)

(2.) It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that both the issues (i) whether the suit premises falls within the definition of premises as defined under Section 2(i) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958. ii) whether the suit is barred by Section 50 of the said Act as alleged are issues that can be decided only after evidence has been led. These issues cannot be adjudicated without adducing evidence as these are questions of fact.

(3.) Learned counsel for the respondent submits that in view of the lease deed no other evidence be considered and the trial Court was right in concluding that no evidence is needed in the matter.