PANCHOO SINGH Vs. BALA SAHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision under section 35 of the Delhi and Ajmer Rent Control Act, 1952 (No XXXVIII of 1952 ).

(2.) THE respondent Bala Sahai instituted a suit for ejectment and arrears of rent. The allegation was that he required the house bona fide for his own use. A notice was given to the defendant to vacate, but he did not do so. The plea of the defendant, as is evident from a perusal of the judgment of the lower court was that the plaintiff did not require the house bona fide for his own use, and the notice was bad in law. In respect of the claim for arrears of rent, a counter claim for adjustment of a certain sum spent by the defendant on repairs was made. The defence was struck off because of the non-compliance of the order given by the court under section 13 (5) of the Act. Thereafter the trial court held that the plaintiff bona fide required the premises for his own use, and the notice was valid. The plaintiff's claim for ejectment was decreed and arrears were also decreed to the extent of Rs. 10/ -. The plaintiff was further granted damages for use and occupation at Rs. 10/- p. m. from the date of suit till delivery of possession on payment of additional court fee. The defendant filed an appeal, which was dismissed by the Senior Sub-Judge, First class, Ajmer, on 27-3-1957. The defendant has come in revision under section 35 of the Delhi and Ajmer Rent Control Act, 1952.

(3.) THE powers of revision under section 35 of the Delhi and Ajmer Rent Control act, 1952, are slightly larger than those conferred under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for that section says: