DAL CHAND Vs. OMKAR SAROOP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) EJECTMENT of present revision-petitioner (hereinafter referred to as 'tenant') from the demised premises was ordered by the Rent Controller, Palwal, District Faridabad by order dated November 29, 2006 on the ground of non-payment of rent and the appeal preferred by the tenant was dismissed by the Appellate Authority by its judgment dated July 31, 2007.

(2.) BY filing the present revision, tenant has sought to impugn both the orders passed by the Courts below referred to above.

(3.) SO far as the first contention is concerned, the legislature has specifically made a distinction between an owner of a premises and a landlord. The Act deals with the rights and obligations of a landlord only as defined in the Act. Ownership for the purpose of a premises is immaterial for the purpose of the Act as has been held in K.D. Dewan v. Harbhajan S. Parihar, 2002(1) RCR(Rent) 214 : AIR 2002 SC 67. Landlord can maintain an application for eviction without being the owner of the premises. It was so ruled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in E. Parashuraman (D) by Lrs. v. V. Doraiswami (D) by L.R., 2005(2) RCR(Rent) 590 : 2005(2) LAR 548 (SC).