SURAJ BHAN Vs. ASHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these petitions arise out of the proceedings relating to the eviction case (E No. 68/2014 new ARC 25867/2016) registered on the application of Suraj Bhan (landlord) who is petitioner in CM (M) 954/2015 and respondent in RC Rev.39/2018 seeking an order of eviction on the ground of bona fide need under Section 14 (1) (e) of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 which is governed by the special procedure envisaged in Section 25 B of the said enactment, such proceedings being directed against Asha (concededly a tenant) in the premises in question.

(2.) It appears the tenant had earlier filed an application for leave to defend in the afore-said proceedings on 20th August, 2014, the landlord having raised the issue of such application having been filed belatedly beyond the statutorily permissible period of 15 days after service in terms of Section 25 B of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958. The objection about the application for leave to defend being filed belatedly and hence not maintainable was considered by the Additional Rent Controller and rejected by order dated 25.08.2015 which was challenged by the landlord by CM (M) 954/2015.

(3.) Later, however, the new presiding officer in the Court of Additional Rent Controller reconsidered the said issue and by order dated 16.08.2017, observed that the application for leave to contest was belated not having been presented within the statutorily permissible period of 15 days after service. He also went into the merits of the application for leave to defend and returned a finding that no triable issues had been raised, consequently passed an order of eviction on 16.08.2017 which is challenged by the tenant by RC Rev. 39/2018.