SHRI J. MAHAJAN Vs. SMT. LILA WATI KAPOOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The landlady Lila Wati Kapoor seeks ejectment of the tenant J. Mahajan on the ground of personal bonafide requirement under Section 14(1)(e) read with the newly introduced procedure of Chapter III-A of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (the Act). Under the procedure the application of ejectment was tried in a summary fashion. The tenant asked for leave to defend. The Additional Rent Controller came to conclusion that the tenant had no defence to the claim. He, therefore, made an order for recovery of possession against the tenant. The tenant has now come in revision under Section 25-B(8) of the Act.

(2.) The house in question No. A-23 Nizamuddin West consists of two floors, namely, the ground floor and the first floor. Admittedly the entire first floor was let to the tenant on June 1, 1974 at a monthly rent of Rs. 1200/-. The tenant in his application for leave to contest raised mainly one ground of defence. He said that the ground floor of the house is in occupation of the landlady and that she is residing there and does not require any more accommodation. The learned Additional Rent Controller dealt with the objection. He said : "the main objection of the respondent is that the petitioner is already in occupation of the ground floor and is having sufficient accommodation. However, the petitioner has denied this fact in the affidavit." The Additional Controller then accepted the case pleading that the landlady had never expected that she will be ordered to vacate the premises at Curzon Road where she was previously residing as a tenant with her husband and which she vacated after the death of her husband on March 28, 1973. The Additional Controller refused leave to the tenant to contest the application and ordered his eviction, as I have said.

(3.) In my opinion the tenant's affidavit raises a triable defence. The tenant has disclosed facts which if proved would disentitle the landlady from obtaining an order for the recovery of possession of the premises. The defence is positive and precise. Therefore, the twin test of plausibility of defence is satisfied by the tenant. If the landlady is in occupation of the ground floor and is residing there she has no case for eviction of the tenant. This is a foundational fact. This is the corner stone of the tenant's defence.