DEFENCE ESTATES OFFICER Vs. DR. J.K. YADAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Admittedly, after having received the summons (specified in the second Schedule), the Defendants/present applicants did not file any application within 15 days seeking leave to defend as contemplated under Section 23 -C of the Act and if that would be the position, I am of the view that the provision of Section 23 -C is quite clear that in default of obtaining leave to defend, the statement made by the landlord in the application for eviction shall be deemed to be admitted by the tenant and thereafter the Rent Controlling Authority pass an order of eviction of the tenant from the accommodation. There is a proviso in Section that in case of showing the sufficient cause by the tenant, the RCA can excuse the delay in entering appearance or in applying for leave to defend the application for eviction. However, in the present case, even after expiry of 15 days from the date, the summons were served on the Defendants, no application was filed by the Defendants to condone the delay and no application was filed so seeking leave to defend. I do not find any merit in the contention of learned Counsel for the Defendants that since the written statement was filed, therefore, it should be deemed that leave to defend has been granted. In the case of Bhanwarlal v. T.N. Saxena, 1993 (1) MPWN Note 86, this Court has categorically held that if application to obtain leave to defend has not been applied for, merely written statement is filed, would be of no consequence. Later on Division Bench of this Court in Smt. Paramjeet Kaur Bamba v. Smt. Jasbir Kaur Wadha, 2007 (4) MPHT 238, has categorically held that as soon as leave to defend the eviction application under Section 23 -C of the Act is granted 'the' Rent Controlling Authority is obliged to decide the eviction application and there is no need to file written statement. This Court further held that Section 23 -D of the Act does not provide for filing of written statement by the tenant. The decision of Smt. Paramjeet Kaur Bamba (supra) was passed on the question referred to the Division Bench.

(2.) Since leave to defend was never applied by the Defendant, under Section 23 -C of the Act it shall be deemed that the averments made in the application of eviction are admitted to the Defendant and, therefore, I am of the view that learned Rent Controlling Authority did not commit any error in passing the order of eviction.