VINOD NAGPAL Vs. BAKSHI S KULJAS RAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant herein was defendant in the suit (S. No. 108(80), instituted by the respondent, in respect to a plot of land bearing No. E-2, Bali Nagar, New Delhi, which was alleged to have been let out to him under an agreement dated 22nd May, 1971 initially for a period of 11 months and extended from time to tims upto 22nd February, 1976. The suit was for recovery of possession on the plea that she tenancy of the defendant (appellant herein), had come to an end by efflux of time, having nut been renewed after 22nd of February, 1976 but nevertheless as a measure of abundant caution, the plaintiff also served a notice of termination of tenancy on the defendant with effect from 22nd March, 1977, by means of notice dated 28th February, 1977 duly served upon him, and that since the defendant had refused to surrender possession despite this notice, the suit was necessitated.

(2.) The suit was contested on a number of pleas, including denial of status of the plaintiff as landlord, and also assailing the enforceability of the lease deed on the ground that it was in the name of plaintiff's father who was dead at the time the lease deed was executed and consequently no legal document could be said to have come into existence. The main defence, however, was that the subject matter of the suit was not a plot of land, but 'premises' within the meaning of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, and as such, civil suit for recovery of possession was not maintainable, and the same was barred under the provisions of the afoarsaid Act. The legality and validity of the notice of termination of tenancy was also questioned.

(3.) The trial court upheld the plea of the tenant as to the nature of the property which was subject matter of the rent note dated 22nd May, 1971 and held it to be 'premises' as contended by him, and accordingly recorded the finding that jurisdiction of the civil court was barred, and thus dismissed suit of the plaintiff.