KANHIYA LAL BANSAL Vs. RAJ NATH SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal under section 39 of the Delhi Rent Control Act is directed agairst the order of Mr. P.K. Bahri,Rent Control Tribunal, upholding the order of the Additional Controller.

(2.) The relevant facts, in brief, are these. One Raghu Nath Sharma was the owner of house No. 21, Bazar Lane, Babar Road, New Delhi. He rented it to Kanhiya Lal Bansal (the tenant), the present appellant. He served a notice dated December 2, 1955 (Exhibit AW5/9) on the tenant terminating his tenancy. On the failure of the tenant to vacate, he filed a eviction petition on the ground of bona-fide requirement for his residence. On the basis of a compromise, eviction order allowing time to the tenant upto December 31, 1958 to vacate the premises was passed. The tenant refused to vacate and challenged the order as a nullity. During these proceedings, Raghu Nath Sharma died and his legal representatives (the landlords), the present respondents, were brought on record. The matter went upto the Supreme Court which upheld the contention of the tenant that the order of eviction was a nullity. AIR 1970 S.C. 838). Soon thereafter the landlords served a fresh notice dated May 12 1969 again terminating the old contractual tenancy of the tenant. This notice is Exhibit AW5/5. On the failure of the tenant to vacate, the land-lords filed a petition on October 18, 1969 for eviction of the tenant under Section 14(1) (e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act on the ground of bona-fide requirements for their residence and the members of their families. The additional Controller passed an order for eviction of the tenant. The tenant's appeal to the Tribunal, as already stated, was dismissed.

(3.) The only question raised by Mr. S. N. Chopra, learned counsel for the tenant-appellant, is that notice Exhibit AW 5/5 terminating the tenancy of the tenant, is defective because it was not given on behalf of Jatinder Nath Sharma, a co-owner, who was a minor. In order to appreciate the contention it is necessary to note some more facts. Jatinder Nath Sharma is one of the sons of the deceased, RaghuNath Sharma. He was a minor in May, 1969 when notice Ex. AW5/5 was given. Raj Nath Sharma is the eldest son of Raghu Nath Sharma. He instructed the lawyer on his behalf as well as guardian of Jatinder Nath Sharma and as attorney of other co-owners to send the notice (Exhibit AW5/5) to the tenant. The parties do not dispute that Raj Nath Sharma could not act as guardian of Jatinder Nath Sharma since the minor's mother, is a natural guardian, was alive.