Delhi High Court - Orders
Shri Babu Ram Gupta vs Shri Chander Prakash on 3 March, 2022
Author: Najmi Waziri
Bench: Najmi Waziri
$~4(1)
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ RC.REV. 161/2021, CM APPL. 39282/2021, CM APPL. 39283/2021
& CM APPL. 42938/2021
SHRI BABU RAM GUPTA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Shiv Charan Garg and Mr. Imran
Khan, Advocates.
versus
SHRI CHANDER PRAKASH ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. M.L. Bajaj, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI
ORDER
% 03.03.2022 The hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode (physical and virtual hearing).
1. The impugned order dated 06.09.2021 passed by the learned ARC, granting the respondent a leave to defend is contended to be erroneous, on the ground that since the respondent/tenant admits to the landlord-tenant relationship with the petitioner, there was no requirement to prove the ownership of the premises under the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958.
2. It is further contended that, in any case, the petitioner's ownership also has been admitted by the tenant in the paragraph 8 of the aforesaid order which reads, inter-alia, as under:
"...
8. In the present petition, although the respondent has not disputed the ownership of the petitioner over the tenanted Signature Not Verified Digitally signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:08.03.2022 18:06:25 premises. Also, he has not disputed the existence of landlord tenant relationship between them. The petitioner has stated that the suit premises was purchased by his father, i.e., Sh. Prahlad Singh Gupta vide Registered Sale Deed dated 17.07.1946, however, the said Registered Sale Deed is not filed on record. Nor has the petitioner filed the death certificate of Sh. Prahlad Singh Gupta, who died on 08.11.1982. Petitioner has filed Registered Release/Relinquishment Deeds dated 02.01.1992, 04.06.1987, 18.07.1985 and Will dated 24.12.2007 executed by Sh. Prem Sagar Gupta in favour of the petitioner and consequently, the petitioner became the owner/landlord of the suit premises. The petitioner has filed a rent receipt dated 15.01.2017 for the period of 01.10.2015 to 30.09.2016 bearing the signature of the petitioner as well as of tenant/respondent in respect of the tenanted premises. Furthermore, the respondent has also annexed two rent receipts in original dated 07.01.2016 & 02.07.2016 with his leave to defend affidavit/application.
The petitioner has not annexed the Registered Sale Deed dated 17.07.1946 vide which his father Sh. Prahlad Singh Gupta became the owner of the suit premises. Petitioner has also no filed the death certificate of Sh. Prahlad Singh Gupta. The complete chain of devolution of ownership has not been filed by the petitioner because in bonafide cases, the petitioner is required to show prima facie the trail of devolution of ownership. Therefore, from the perusal of material on record, the existence of relationship of landlord and tenant stands proved. However, ownership of the petitioner is required to be proved prima facie by the petitioner which needs evidence to be advanced by the parties.
..."
3. Prima-facie, the court is of the view that once the respondent acknowledges the petitioner as a landlord, it does not remain a triable issue. Therefore, granting leave to defend, on that ground, would be erroneous.
Signature Not Verified Digitally signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:08.03.2022 18:06:254. Issue notice.
5. The learned counsel named above accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.
6. Reply and rejoinder, if any, be filed in four weeks each, successively.
7. List on 29.08.2022.
8. There shall be stay of further proceedings before the learned Trial Court.
NAJMI WAZIRI, J MARCH 3, 2022 SS Signature Not Verified Digitally signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:08.03.2022 18:06:25