Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi District Court

Sanjay Goel vs Champa Devi on 1 May, 2024

        IN THE COURT OF MS. ARJINDER KAUR, ARC-02
            (CENTRAL), TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
ARC No: 83/2017
U/s. 45 of DRC Act
Sh. Sanjay Goel
S/o Late Sh. Yad Ram
R/o House No. 1974, First Floor,
Gali Neela Wali, Arya Samaj,
Sita Ram bazar, Delhi -110006
                                                        .......Petitioner
                                   Versus
Smt. Champa Devi
R/o House No. 1974, Second Floor,
Gali Neela Wali, Arya Samaj,
Sita Ram bazar, Delhi -110006

through its LRs
1. Sh. Satya Narain Sharma
S/o Late Sh. Badri Prasad Sharma
R/o H.No. G-248, Block -G,
Preet Vihar, Delhi-110092
2. Smt. Kavita Sharma
W/o Late Sh. Raj Kumar Sharma
3. Sh. Abhishek Sharma,
S/o Late Sh. Raj Kumar
Both R/o 113, First Floor,
Puspanjali, Delhi-110092
4. Smt. Aishwarya
W/o Sh. Uday Bagga
ARC No. 83/2017           Sanjay Goel Vs. Champa Devi       Page No. 1/9
 D/o Late Sh. Raj Kumar Sharma
R/o 149, Fourth Floor,
Pushpanjali, Delhi-110092

                                                           .....Respondents

Date of institution of the case        : 20.07.2014
Date of order pronounced               : 01.05.2024

                                   ORDER

1. This is an application under Section 45 of the Delhi Rent Control Act filed by the applicant Sh. S.K Goel seeking restoration of electricity connection in the tenanted premises and directions for the respondent to issue necessary no objection certificate in favour of the applicant.

THE PETITION

2. As per the application, applicant/tenant has been occupying the tenanted premises bearing no. 1974, First Floor, Gali Neela Wali, Arya Samaj, Sita Ram Bazar, 110006 since long and earlier the landlord/respondent had provided the facility of electricity in the tenanted premises, but later on the landlord had illegally disconnected /cut off the electricity connection from the portion of the tenant/tenanted premises. That since then the applicant/tenant has been facing lot of problem in occupying the tenanted premises without the electricity and despite that the applicant/tenant has also been facing the number of theft cases of electricity which were imposed by the electricity department. That ARC No. 83/2017 Sanjay Goel Vs. Champa Devi Page No. 2/9 electricity and water are the basic amenities and in summer season it is very difficult for the applicant/respondent to reside in the tenanted premises. It is prayed that landlord/respondent may be further directed to restore the electricity connection in the tenanted premises and directed to issue the necessary objection certificate in favour of applicant as per requirement of electricity department.

WRITTEN STATEMENT

3. It is stated in WS that the present application of applicant is liable to dismissed u/o 7 Rule 11 CPC as the applicant has concealed the fact that similar case for grant of electricity connection filed by his wife Smt. Usha Goyal bearing suit no. 1512/2011, titled Smt. Usha Goyal vs. BSES Yamuna Power Ltd was dismissed in default. It is further stated that similar suit was filed by applicant bearing suit no. 23/2015 wherein present respondent arrayed as defendant no. 2 and said suit was also dismissed vide order dated 28.04.2016. That applicant is not making any payment of rent to the respondent since long and electricity meter leading to the tenanted premises had already been disconnected by BSES. That since the disconnection, the applicant and his wife are using the electricity by illegal means and number of theft cases have been booked against them. That Smt. Usha Goyal claims herself to be owner of the premises but no document has been placed on record, whereas Sanjay Goel who is the tenant in the premises had not paid rent since last about 7 years. That respondent never disconnected the electricity supply of the ARC No. 83/2017 Sanjay Goel Vs. Champa Devi Page No. 3/9 premises and same was disconnected by the concerned department i.e. BSES Yamuna Power Ltd due to non payment of electricity charges. Rest of the contentions of the petition have been denied in toto. Hence, The dismissal of the present petition has been prayed for.

REPLICATION

4. Replication was filed on behalf of the petitioner to the written statement of the respondents denying the averment made in the written statement.

EVIDENCE OF PETITIONER

5. Petitioner got examined himself as PW-1 and tendered evidence by way of affidavit vide Ex. PW1/A and relied upon the documents i.e. copies of complaints to SHO PS Hauz Qazi dated 14.06.2011, 30.03.2011 and 15.3.2011 filed by wife of deponent Mark A, copies of assessed theft bills Mark B (Colly), copies of paid bills Mark C and copy of settlement of mediation dated 29.11.2016 mark D. 5.1 Vide order dated 21.04.2022 PE was closed.

EVIDENCE OF RESPONDENT

6. RW1 Sh. Arjun Pandit who brought summoned record i.e. certified copy of theft bills in respect of suit premises Ex.RW1/1. 6.1 Vide separate statement of counsel for respondent, RE was closed on 05.07.2022.

ARGUMENTS

7. I have heard the arguments at length and have also carefully ARC No. 83/2017 Sanjay Goel Vs. Champa Devi Page No. 4/9 gone through the testimonies of the witnesses, documents and material on record and case law relied upon.

THE LAW

8. Section 45 of the DRC ACT:- Cutting off or withholding essential supply or service:-

1) No landlord either himself or through any person purporting to act on his behalf shall without just and sufficient cause cut off or withhold any essential supply or service enjoyed by the tenant in respect of the premises let to him.

2) If a landlord contravenes the provisions of sub-

section(1), the tenant may make an application to the controller complaining of such contravention.

3) If the controller is satisfied that essential supply or service was cut off or withheld by the landlord with a view to compel the tenant to vacate the premises or to pay an enhanced rent, the controller may pass an order directing the landlord to restore the amenities immediately, pending the inquiry referred to in sub- section(4).

Explanation:- An interim order may be passed under the sub-section without giving notice to the landlord.

4) If the controller on inquiry finds that the essential ARC No. 83/2017 Sanjay Goel Vs. Champa Devi Page No. 5/9 supply or service enjoyed by the tenant in respect of the prmises was cut off or withheld by the landlord without just and sufficient cause, he shall make an order directing the landlord to restore such supply or service.

5) The controller may in his discretion direct that compensation not exceeding fifty rupees-

a) be paid to the landlord by the tenant, if the application under sub-section(2) was made frivolously or vexatiously.

b) be paid to the tenant by the landlord, if the landlord had cut off or withheld the supply or service without just and sufficient cause.

Explanation I- In this section, "essential supply or service" includes supply of water, electricity, lights in passages and on staircases, conservancy and sanitary services.

Explanation II- For the purposes of this section, withholding any essential supply or service shall include acts or omissions attributable to the landlord on accoount of thich the essential supply or service is cut off by the local authority or any order competent authority............"

9. On the other hand, it is the case of the respondent/landlord that electricity was never supplied by the landlord and the disconnection, ARC No. 83/2017 Sanjay Goel Vs. Champa Devi Page No. 6/9 if any, has been done by the concerned department and not the respondent/landlord.

10. Further it is apparent from the bare perusal of S.45 that the following ingredients must be fullfilled by the tenant to seek relief under this section:-

I) There must be relationship of landlord and tenant.

II) The tenant must show that he was enjoying the essential supply and was entitled to it.

III) That the landlord has withheld the essential supply without any just cause.

FACTUAL ANALYSIS

1. LANDLORD-TENANT RELATIONSHIP

11. The petitioner while deposing as PW1, through his evidence affidavit stated that he has been "occupying" the tenanted premises since long. Petitioner did not state that he is tenant in the suit premises. Also during his cross, PW-1 clearly stated that " it is correct that I am not the tenant of the said premises and my wife alone is the tenant in relation to the said property". Thus the petitioner has failed to fulfill the very first ingredient.

(II) ENJOYMENT OF ELECTRICITY CONNECTION AND ARC No. 83/2017 Sanjay Goel Vs. Champa Devi Page No. 7/9 WITHHOLDING BY LANDLORD

12. In his affidavit, the PW1 stated that earlier the landlord respondent has provided the facility of electricity but later on the landlord had illegally disconnected the electricity connection from the deponent's premises. However during his cross, PW1 stated that earlier meter through which electricity was supplied was in the name of Sh. Ajay Pratap and the same was got removed by Sh. Ajay Pratap. "PW1 also stated that, he was not present at the house at the time of disconnection of the electricity and he did not file any complain in respect of same at any point of time. He also stated that he did not remember as to when his electricity was disconnected. Also the petitioner failed to bring on record any document/bill to prove that he was enjoying electricity connection in the suit premises. The petitioner has also utterly failed to prove that the supply of electricity connection has been withheld by respondent Champa Devi.

CONCLUSION

13. I have perused the entire record minutely including the case law relied upon in the present petition U/Sec.45 of D.R.C. Act, statements of parties, documents and material on record, which show that the applicant has not been able to satisfy all the ingredients of Sec. 45 of D.R.C. Act. Hence, the applicant is not entitled to the relief as claimed by him in the petition/application U/Sec. 45 of D.R.C. Act.

14. In consequence thereof, the present petition U/Sec. 45 of D.R.C. Act filed by the Applicant is hereby dismissed.

15. File be consigned to Record Room after due compliance.

(ARJINDER KAUR) ARC-02 (Central) Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (Announced in open court on 01.05.2024).