P N KARKHANIS Vs. P N CHOPRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision petition on behalf of the tenant under provisio to sub-section (8) of section 25-B of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, as amended by the Delhi Rent Control (Amendment) Act, 1976 against the order dated June 4, 1976 passed by the Rent Controller, Delhi rejecting her application seeking permission to contest the petition for eviction filed by the respondent against the petitioner under section 14-A read with section 14 (1) (e) of the aforesaid Act.

(2.) The respondent, Mr. P.N. Chopra, son of Mr. A.N. Chopra, filed a petition for eviction of the petitioner, Mrs. P.N. Karkhanis on the ground that the premises in suit were let out to the tenant-respondent for residential purposes are required bonafide by the respondent landlord who is the owner thereof for occupation as residence for himself and for members of his family, dependent upon him. It was further alleged that the respondent-landlord is a Chief Engineer, Metropolitan Transport Project Ministry of Railways and in that capacity had been allotted bungalow No. 28, Railway Colony, Sardar Patel Marg, New Delhi and the landlord has been notified by the Central Government to vacate and surrender possession of the Government accommodation by December 31, 1975 and that the petitioner has no accommodation in his possession. It was also alleged in the petition that Shri N.D. Karkhanis, husband of Mrs. P.N. Karkhanis, was a statutory tenant. His tenancy was determined by notice dated June 18, 1973 sent by registered A.D. post. A reply to this notice, dated June 28, 1973 was also received. It was also averred that under the Delhi Rent Control (Amendment) Ordinance, 1975 (No. 24 of 1975), only Mrs. P.N. Karkhanis had become the tenant in place of Mr. N.D. Karkhanis. It was also pleaded that a notice dated December 7, 1975 terminating the tenancy of Mrs. P.N. Karkhanis had been duly served on her and all other heirs have also been asked to deliver the possession.

(3.) On summons being served on the petitioner in accordance with the form specified in the third Schedule of the Delhi Rent Control (Amendment) Act, 1976, the petitioner filed an application dated March 20, 1976 praying for leave to defend the petition being granted and the main petition being heard on merits. Alongwith the said application, an affidavit of the petitioner of the same date was also filed.