RAMAN ARORA Vs. NIRMALA AGGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent as a landlord of the suit premises bearing Flat No. 34, Type A, Plot No. 69, Kamayani Kunj, I.P. Extention, Delhi, filed Civil Suit No. 621/96 for the appellant's eviction, who admittedly was his tenant at monthly rent of Rs. 3,300.00 , on the ground that his tenancy was determined by a statutory notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act.

(2.) The appellant resisted the suit for eviction denying termination of tenancy under Section 106 of the T.P. Act. It was denied that the suit premises are exempt from the operation of the Delhi Rent Control Act. It was averred that the suit is barred under Section 50 of the Delhi Rent Control Act.

(3.) It is undisputed that on 8.3.1994, the respondent/ landlord had let out the suit premises to the appellant/ tenant at monthly rent of Rs. 3,300.00 and the notice to quit dated 4.3.1995 was served upon the appellant. By that notice the appellant's tenancy was terminated w.e.f. 7.4.95. On the basis of these admissions, the learned Additional District Judge concluded that the appellant's tenancy was duly determined by the notice to quit dated 4.3.1995. As regards the question of jurisdiction raised by the appellant, the learned Additional District Judge held that the suit premises are exempt from the operation of the Delhi Rent Control Act and as such the present suit is not barred under Section 50 of the said Act. Accordingly, the learned Additional District Judge decreed the respondent's suit for eviction. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the Trial Court, the appellant has come up in appeal before this Court.