FARAH Vs. SHAHNAZ BEGUM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal arises out of judgement and decree dated 2nd January, 2016 by which the Trial Court has dismissed the suit for possession and mesne profits on the ground that the Respondent/Defendant (hereinafter "Defendant") is a tenant of the Appellant/Plaintiff (hereinafter "Plaintiff") and the suit is barred under Section 50 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter, "DRC Act").

(2.) Admittedly, the Defendant is the aunt (Mausi) of the Plaintiff. It is the case of the Plaintiff that she is the rightful owner of the property bearing No. 17/17-V, Khasra No. 17 & 18, Vijay Park, Maujpur, Delhi-110053, measuring 70 square yards (hereinafter, "suit property"). It is the case of both parties that in 2010, some unwanted elements were trying to take over possession of the suit property. At that stage, the Plaintiff had allowed the Defendant to live in the property as a caretaker. Thereafter, the Defendant's son was arrested under some criminal complaint and the Plaintiff argues that in order to enable the Defendant to have proof of address and meet him in jail or in Court, a rent agreement dated 20th September, 2011 came to be executed between the parties. Defendant in the written statement, admits that a rent agreement was executed in her favour by the Plaintiff, but denies that her son being in jail was the reason for it.

(3.) The Defendant was repeatedly asked to vacate the suit premises but did not vacate. On 20th May, 2013 the Plaintiff filed a written complaint with the police against the Defendant. The Defendant then filed a suit against the Plaintiff wherein the Plaintiff gave an undertaking that she would not dispossess the Defendant, except in accordance with law. A legal notice was then issued by the Plaintiff on 25th June, 2013 asking the Defendant to hand over vacant and peaceful possession of the suit property. Due to the Defendant's refusal to vacate the suit property, the present suit came to be instituted for possession, damages and mesne profits.