PARAMJIT SINGH Vs. PARKASH KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filedunder the proviso to sub-section (8) of section 25B of the DelhiRent Control Act. 59 of 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').as amended by Act No. 18 of 1976 with effect from 1/12/1975.

(2.) The material facts of the case are that the respondent landlady is the owner and landlord in respect of the premises in dispute,which consists of the first floor of the house No. B-3/4, RameshNagar, New Delhi. It was let out to the petitioner at the rate ofRs. 75.00 per month. The respondent had instituted a petition on 27/01/1976 for eviction of the petitioner on the grounds ofbona fide personal necessity, the tenant not living in the premises formore than one year, and unlawful subletting being the groundsmentioned in clauses (e), (d) and (b) of the provisos to sub-section(1) of section 14 and 14A(1) of the Act. Notice of this petition wasissued and served on the petitioner, who filed a written statementto the same. While this petition has been contested, the respondentlandlady stated before the Controller that she pressed only the groundmentioned under section 14A of the Act as amended and no otherground. The Controller therefore, served the summons according tothe amended procedure, on the petitioner on 8/03/1976. Thepetitioner thereafter made an application for permission to appearand contest the petition and he raised various pleas. The Controllerbelow found that there was no substance in the contentions of thepetitioner tenant, in particular against the bona fides of the claimof the respondent owner and the sufficiency of the accommodationavailable with her and as such he refused the application for leave tocontest, and in accordance with the provisions of law passed an orderfor eviction allowing the petitioner two months time to vacate thepremises. This order has been passed on 6/09/1976 andhas been assailed in this revision by the petitioner tenant.

(3.) The respondent landlady is also owner of the ground floor of property bearing No. B-3/3, Ramesh Nagar, and she instituted apetition for eviction against another tenant, named R. K. Sharma, on 26/04/1976 claiming eviction under section 14A of the Act,on the allegations that she was a Government servant, and her allotment of Government accommodation had been cancelled and she hadno other residence available to her and so she claimed eviction of thetenant. This petition was registered and was tried in the summarymanner provided by section 25B of the Act. The Controller by orderdated 5/05/1976 rejected the application of the other tenant,R. K. Sharma, for leave to defend the petition. As a result, an orderfor eviction of that tenant was passed. The aforesaid order for eviction has become final and binding upon the parties. It may, however,be stated that the rate of rent in that case was Rs. 150.00 per monthwhile the accommodation is the same.