B M CHANANA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Important question which arises in this writ petition is with regard to the interpretation and the validity of some of the provisions which have been newly added to Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 as a result of the amendment, by Act 57 of 1988.

(2.) The petitioner became a tenant of respondent No. 3, on 1-5-1977 in respect of residential flat owned by the said respondent No. 3. On 15-7-1987 the respondent No. 3 filed a petition for eviction of the petitioner inter alia on the ground that respondent No. 3 required the said premises for his own use and for use of the persons dependant upon him. After the petition under Section 14(1)(e) read with Section 25B of the Rent Control Act was filed the petitioner applied to the Rent Controller for leave to contest the petition. On 26-5-1988 respondent No. 3 conceded the said application and leave to contest was granted.

(3.) Respondent No. 3 is employed in the Northern Railway and is a Government servant. The Parliament passed the Delhi Rent Control (Amendment) Act 1988 seeking to incorporate certain important provisions in the Rent Control Act. According to the statement of Objects and Reasons the amendment was brought out for the following reasons :-