SURESH KUMAR MICHANDANI Vs. SHYAM SUNDER LAL JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rfa No. 775/2016 & 424/2017

(2.) The facts of the case are that admittedly the appellant/defendant was inducted as a tenant of the suit property B3/901, 9th Floor, Sunny Valley Apartment, Sector-12, Dwarka, New Delhi, in terms of the Lease Deed/Rent Agreement dated 23.08.2012 entered into between the appellant/defendant and Smt. Pushplata Jain, the wife of the respondent/plaintiff. The rate of rent admittedly as per the Rent Agreement dated 23.08.2012 was fixed at Rs. 23,000/- per month. The Rent Agreement was for eleven months only commencing from 01.09.2012, and the same is an unregistered Lease Agreement. The subject suit for possession and mesne profits was filed by the respondent/plaintiff pleading termination of tenancy of the appellant/defendant on account of non-payment of rent as also the fact that the tenancy being monthly tenancy was terminated in terms of a Legal Notice dated 012013.

(3.) In Delhi, once there exists a relationship of landlord and tenant, the tenancy is outside the scope of protection of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 if the rent is more than Rs. 3,500/- per month, then in such a scenario a suit for possession is decreed because even if the Legal Notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act 1882, is not served, yet filing of the suit is taken as notice of termination of tenancy vide Jeevan Diesel and Electricals Limited v. Jasbir Singh Chadha (HUF) and Another, (2010) 6 SCC 601.