CHITTAR MAL Vs. SHANTI AGGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has arisen from the order dated 5th February, 1979 passed by the Additional Rent Controller, Delhi declining an application under Order 13 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Code for leave to file certain additional documents.

(2.) Smt. Shanti Aggarwal (respondentlandlady) filed a petition for eviction under Section 14 (1) (b) and Chapter lll-A of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 against Shri Chittar Mal (petitioner-tenant). The summons under the Act were issued to the tenant who filed an application under Section 25(B) (iv) of the said Act for leave to defend. After consideration of the material on the record, the Additional Rent Controller, Delhi came to the conclusion that the affidavits of the tenant have disclosed the facts, which if proved will disentitle the landlady from claiming eviction of the tenant under Clause (b). The tenant filed the written statement. The landlady filed the replication and the case was fixed for evidence of the landlady on 1st December, 1977. The landlady closed the evidence on 25th October, 1978 when the case was adjourned to 5th and 6th of February, 1979 for the tenant's evidence.

(3.) The tenant moved an application dated 3rd January, 1979 under Order 13 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Code for leave of the Court to place certain documents on the record on the ground that these documents are very material for proving the purpose of letting which was residential-cum-commercial, The explanation for delay in filing the documents given is that these documents were mixed up with some old papers and the tenant came into their possession vary recently. The application was resisted by the landlady. In the impugned order the Additional Rent Controller observed that the perusal of the written statement filed by the respondent that no such plea was ever taken by the tenant, that one Rukhmani Devi who was the original owner of the premises, and not the landlady herself, had been issuing the rent receipts or bills in order to show that the premises were lei for residential-cum-commercial purposes The documents were not allowed to be filed at the belated stage.