Delhi District Court
Ajit Singh Yadav vs Reshma Khan on 16 February, 2026
In the Court of SCJ-cum-RC, (West District)
Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.
Presided by : Ms. Richa Sharma
RC ARC No. 69/23
CNR No. DLWT03-002046-2023
Sh. Ajit Singh Yadav,
S/o Sh. Ram Gopal Yadav,
R/o WZ-391, Madipur Village,
New Delhi-110063 ...... Petitioner
Versus
Smt. Reshma Khan,
W/o Sh. Arshi Khan,
WZ-326, Second Floor,
Madipur Village,
New Delhi -110063 ....Respondent
Date of Filing : 05.08.2023
Date of Judgment : 16.02.2026
JUDGMENT
1. The brief outlines of the case of the petitioner is, that the present petition has been filed against the respondent under section 14 (1) (a) of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as "DRC Act") thereby seeking eviction from one room with common latrine and bathroom on second floor, bearing the address at WZ-326, Madipur Village, New Delhi-110063, measuring '10X13' part of second floor, more specifically shown in red colour in the site plan attached with the petition (hereinafter referred to as 'tenanted premises').
Averments by the petitioner in petition ARC No. 69/2023 Ajit Singh Yadav Vs Reshma Khan Page No. 1 / 12 Digitally signed by RICHA SHARMA RICHA Date: SHARMA 2026.02.16 15:12:20 +0530
2. It is averred by the petitioner, that the present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking eviction of the respondent from the suit premises on ground of non-payment of rent for 8 successive months. It is further averred, that the respondent /tenant subsequently committed successive defaults in payment of rents to the petitioner and the petitioner got issued a demand notice dated 01.06.2023 upon the Respondent, thereby demanding the arrears of rent and terminating his tenancy and to vacate the tenanted premises w.e.f. mid night of 30th June, 2023 or early in the morning of 1st July, 2023.
3. It is further stated, that the arrears of rent w.e.f. September 2022 @ Rs. 3500/- per month till 30.04.2023 which comes to Rs. 28,000/- and in arrears of other charges to the tune of Rs. 1,526/-, Rs. 350/- and Rs. 1070/- as the respondent was irregular and defaulter in payment of rent, electricity and water charges and used to pay in parts as per her own handwriting and Rs. 500/- remained due as arrears of rent for August 2022 and thus total sum of Rs. 31,446/- is due against respondent till 30.04.2023 besides this a sum of Rs. 1896/- is also due towards electricity charges till 30.04.2023 as per respondent's own acknowledgment sent on whatsapp.
WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY RESPONDENT
4. It is contended, that the present petition is not maintainable as the alleged rate of rent exceeds Rs. 3,500/- per month. Hence, the provisions of the Delhi Rent Control Act are not applicable and the petition is liable to be dismissed with costs. It is further contended, that the petitioner has not approached this Court with clean hands and has deliberately concealed material facts. There is no subsisting relationship of landlord and tenant as alleged. On this ground alone, the petition deserves dismissal.
ARC No. 69/2023 Ajit Singh Yadav Vs Reshma Khan Page No. 2 / 12 Digitally signed by RICHA SHARMARICHA Date:
SHARMA 2026.02.16
15:12:34
+0530
5. It is stated, that the respondent was inducted in the premises on 01.04.2021 vide rent agreement dated 01.04.2021 for a period of 11 months at a monthly rent of Rs. 3,500/- excluding other charges. The respondent duly paid rent and other charges in cash, however, the petitioner never issued rent receipts despite repeated demands. It is further stated, that after expiry of the agreement the tenancy continued on a month-to-month basis on the same terms. The respondent paid rent regularly up to 28.02.2023.
6. It is further stated, that in March 2023, due to his financial need, the petitioner proposed to allow the respondent to occupy the premises without monthly rent against a refundable security of Rs. 3,00,000/-, which was paid by the respondent in cash on 05.03.2023. It was agreed, that necessary documents would be executed and the security amount would be refunded at the time of vacating the premises. However, the petitioner deliberately avoided execution of the agreed documents on false pretexts and thereafter issued a false and fabricated legal notice dated 01.06.2023, which was duly replied by the respondent.
Therefore, a prayer for dismissal of the present petition.
PETITIONER EVIDENCE
7. In order to prove its case, plaintiff examined himself as PW-1, who tendered in evidence his duly sworn in affidavit, exhibited as Ex.PW1/A. In his testimony, following documents were exhibited :-
1. Ex. PW1/1 is the site plan
2. Ex. PW1/2 is the rent agreement dated 01.04.2021 Digitally
3. Copy of hand written letter is deexhibited today and is now signed by marked as Mark A RICHA RICHA SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2026.02.16 15:12:41 +0530 ARC No. 69/2023 Ajit Singh Yadav Vs Reshma Khan Page No. 3 / 12
4. Ex. PW1/4(colly) is the legal notice dated 01.06.2023 with speed post receipt and tracking report
5. Ex. PW1/5 is the reply of defendant dated 02.06.2023 to the legal notice
8. PW-1 was cross-examined at length by the Ld. Counsel for the respondent and thereafter, PE was closed vide order dated 26.11.2024 and the matter was listed for RE.
EVIDENCE LED BY THE RESPONDENT
9. In order to prove her case, the respondent examined herself as RW-1 and she tendered in evidence her duly sworn affidavit exhibited as Ex.RW1/A. She relied upon the following documents:
1. Copy of Aadhar card of the deponent is Ex. RW-1/1 (OSR)
2. Copy of NCR dated 13.07.2023 is Ex. RW-1/2(colly) (OSR)
3. Copy of police complaint dated 13.11.2023 is Ex. RW-1/3 (colly) (OSR)
4. Copy of police complaint dated 07.06.2023 is Ex. RW-1/4 (colly) (OSR)
5. Copy of police complaint dated 07.07.2023 is Ex. RW-1/5 (colly) (OSR)
6. Copy of police complaint dated 06.06.2023 (Ex. RW-1/6 is de-
exhibited as the same is not on record)
7. Notice dated 06.06.2024 (Ex. RW-1/7 is de-exhibited as the same is not on record)
8. Reply of notice dated 06.06.2024 (Ex. RW-1/8 is de-exhibited as the same is not on record)
10. RW-1 was cross-examined at length by the Ld. Counsel for the petitioner ARC No. 69/2023 Digitally Ajit Singh Yadav Vs Reshma Khan Page No. 4 / 12 signed by RICHA RICHA SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2026.02.16 15:12:50 +0530 and thereafter, respondent further examined Sh. Firoz Khan, S/o Sh. Shamshad Ali, as RW-2 and he tendered in evidence his duly sworn affidavit exhibited as Ex.RW2/A. Thereafter, RE was closed vide order dated 18.09.2025 and the matter was listed for final arguments.
11. Final arguments were duly advanced by the Ld. counsels for both the parties and written submissions had also been filed on behalf of both the parties. I have duly considered the arguments advanced before the court as well as have perused the evidence on record carefully alongwith written synopsis.
12. I have heard the arguments advanced by the Ld. Counsels for both the parties and I have gone through the record carefully and meticulously.
Section 14 (1) (a) DRC Act:-
13. At this stage court deems it fit to reproduce the relevant provision of Delhi Rent Control Act so that position of law may be crystal clear:-
"Section-14. Protection of tenant against eviction-
(1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other law or contract, no order or decree for the recovery of possession of any premises shall be made by court or any controller in favour of the landlord against a tenant:
Provided that the controller may, on an application made to him in the prescribed Digitally signed by manner, make an order for recovery of RICHA RICHA possession of the premises on one or more SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2026.02.16 15:12:59 +0530 ARC No. 69/2023 Ajit Singh Yadav Vs Reshma Khan Page No. 5 / 12 of the following grounds only, namely:-
(a) that the tenant has neither paid nor tendered the whole arrears of the rent legally recoverable from him within two months of the day on which a notice of demand for the arrears of rent has been served of him by the landlord in the manner provided in Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (4 of 1882)."
As such, the following are the ingredients of section 14 (1) proviso (a):-
(i). There should be a relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties.
(ii). A legal notice of demand should be served on the tenant by the landlord.
(iii). There should be a non-payment or tendering of legally recoverable arrears of rent from tenant to landlord within two months of service of legal demand notice.
(i) Relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties:-
14. The relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties is not in serious dispute. The respondent herself has admitted in para no. 3 of her preliminary objections, that she was inducted into the tenanted premises on 01.04.2021 vide rent agreement dated 01.04.2021 at a monthly rent of Rs. 3,500/- excluding other charges for a period of 11 months. The contents of para no. 3 of preliminary objections are reproduced as under:-
ARC No. 69/2023 Ajit Singh Yadav Vs Reshma Khan Page No. 6 / 12 Digitally signed by RICHARICHA SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2026.02.16 15:13:06 +0530 "That it is submitted that the respondent was inducted as a tenant on 01.04.2021, in respect of property in question vide rent agreement dated 01.04.2021 for a period of 11 months at the rea of Rs. 3500/- per month excluding other charges as agreed by the petitioner."
15. The respondent has taken a plea, that in March 2023, the tenancy arrangement was altered and the premises were agreed to be occupied without payment of monthly rent against a refundable security of Rs.3,00,000/-. However, no documentary evidence whatsoever has been placed on record by the respondent to substantiate the said plea.
16. Mere bald assertions regarding payment of alleged security amount, in the absence of any written agreement, receipt or independent corroboration, cannot be relied upon, especially when the original rent agreement stands admitted and proved.
17. It is an admitted fact, that the existence of landlord-tenant relationship can be established even by admission of the tenant and execution of rent agreement. Accordingly, this Court has no hesitation in holding that the relationship of landlord and tenant between the petitioner and the respondent stands duly proved.
(ii) Service of Legal Notice of Demand
18. Perusal of the section 14 (1) (a) D.R.C. Act clearly shows, that before initiating the eviction proceeding before the Rent Controller under D.R.C. Act, ARC No. 69/2023 Ajit Singh Yadav Vs Reshma Khan Page No. 7 / 12 Digitally signed by RICHA SHARMA RICHA Date:
SHARMA 2026.02.16
15:13:16
+0530
the landlord has to serve the legal notice demanding the payment of arrears of rent, and if the tenant does not pay or tender the rent within two months of service of such notice, the landlord becomes entitiled to file eviction proceedings under section14 (1) (a) of D.R.C. Act.
19. It is pertinent to reproduce the section 27 of General Clauses Act which is as under:-
Section-27- Meaning of service by post--where any central Act or Regulation made after the commencement of this Act authorizes or requires any document to be served by post, whether the expression "serve" or either of the expressions "give" or "send" or any other expression is used then, unless a different intention appears, the service shall be deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting by registered post, a letter containing the document, and unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post."
16. In the case titled as K. Bhaskaran vs sankaran vaidhyan Balan 1999 A.I.R SC 3762, the Hon'ble supreme court observed :-
"The principle incorporated in section 27 can profitably be imported in a case where the sender has dispatched the notice by post with the correct address written on it. Then it can be deemed to have been served on the sendee unless he proves Digitally signed that it was not really served and that he was not by RICHA SHARMA RICHA SHARMA Date:
2026.02.16 15:13:28 responsible for such non-service."
+0530 ARC No. 69/2023 Ajit Singh Yadav Vs Reshma Khan Page No. 8 / 12
20. Perusal of the record shows, that the petitioner has claimed to have served legal notice dated 01.06.2023 exhibited as Ex. PW-1/4(colly) to pay the arrears of rent on the respondent/tenant but the same were not complied with by the respondent. The postal receipt and tracking report also exhibited as Ex. PW-1/4 (colly), regarding proof of dispatch of the legal demand notice dated 01.06.2023 to the address has also been tendered in evidence, whereas on the contrary the respondent has not been successful in rebutting the claim of the petitioner regarding non service of legal notice. Therefore, in view of the above ruling of Hon'ble Supreme Court, the notice is deemed to be served.
21. It is apposite to note, that the respondent has not disputed the receipt of the said legal demand notice. Rather, the respondent has admittedly sent a reply to the said notice, which is already on record and exhibited as Ex. PW1/5. The act of sending a reply itself amounts to an unequivocal admission of service of the legal demand notice.
22. It is a settled position of law, that once the tenant replies to the legal demand notice, the requirement of proof of service stands fully satisfied and no further evidence is required to establish service of notice. Hence, the ingredient regarding service of a valid legal demand notice as contemplated under Section 14(1)(a) of the DRC Act stands satisfied.
(iii) Non-payment of legally recoverable arrears of rent within two months of service of notice
23. It is well settled law, that when the petitioner files the petition under Section 14 (1) (a) of D.R.C. Act alleging non payment of rent, the onus is always upon the respondent/tenant to prove that she had paid the rent and there was no due ARC No. 69/2023 Ajit Singh Yadav Vs Reshma Khan Page No. 9 / 12 Digitally signed by RICHA SHARMA RICHA Date:
SHARMA 2026.02.16 15:13:36 +0530 against him at the time of service of legal demand notice served by the petitioner on the respondent/tenant.
24. It is the case of the petitioner, that respondent/tenant subsequently committed defaults in payment of rents to the petitioner and the petitioner got issued a demand notice dated 01.06.2023 upon the respondent thereby demanding the arrears of rent and terminating his tenancy and to vacate the tenanted premises w.e.f. mid night of 30 th June, 2023 or early in the morning of 1st July, 2023 and to refute such claim of the petitioner, it has only been counter averred, that the rent has been regularly paid and it has also been averred by the respondent in his WS, that after expiry of the agreement, the tenancy continued on a month-to-month basis on the same terms. The respondent paid rent regularly up to 28.02.2023. It is further stated by the defendant, that in March 2023, due to his financial need, the petitioner proposed to allow the respondent to occupy the premises without monthly rent against a refundable security of Rs.
3,00,000/-, which was paid by the respondent in cash on 05.03.2023. It was agreed that necessary documents would be executed and the security amount would be refunded at the time of vacating the premises. However, the petitioner deliberately avoided execution of the agreed documents on false pretexts. Further, it has also been claimed that receipts were not being issued by the landlord/petitioner, but such averments also do not qualify to be given any consideration because if it had been so, the tenant/respondent had all the rights to apply to this authority under the provision of D.R.C. Act for directing the petitioner to issue the rent receipt but no such steps were taken by the respondent and therefore, his stand does not appear to be genuine and truthful.
25. As such, in view of aforesaid discussion, material on record, testimonies of the witnesses and legal proposition of law, this ingredient in respect of non payment of arrears of legally recoverable rent within two months has also been ARC No. 69/2023 Ajit Singh Yadav Vs Reshma Khan Page No. 10 / 12 Digitally signed by RICHA SHARMA RICHA Date:
SHARMA 2026.02.16 15:13:43 +0530 satisfied by the petitioner within the meaning of under section 14 (1) (a) of D.R.C. Act.
26. In view of the aforesaid discussion and settled proposition of law, this court has come to the conclusion, that the petitioner has satisfied all the ingredients of section 14 (1) (a) of D.R.C. Act in respect of the suit premises i.e. one room with common latrine and bathroom on second floor bearing the address at WZ-326, Madipur Village, New Delhi-110063, measuring '10X13' part of second floor, more specifically as show in red colour of the site plan exhibited as Ex. PW-1/1.
27. Perusal of the record shows, that order under Section 15(1) D.R.C. Act was passed in the present case on 03.09.2024, vide the said order the respondent was directed to deposit amount of Rs. 3500/- per month to be calculated for the period from 01.03.2023 to 01.09.2024 within 30 days from the date of the order i.e. 03.09.2024 in the court in form of automatically renewing fixed deposit and further the respondent shall deposit Rs. 3500/- (being the last paid admitted rent) per month thereafter, month by month inn the court alongwith 15 % interest as per Section 26 of DRC Act and respondent was also directed to regularly deposit the rent month by month by the 15th of each succeding month at the same rate in the court in the form of FDR.
Now, as per the record and the report of the nazir so perused, respondent has already paid the arrers of rent with effect from 01.03.2023 to 31.01.2026 alongwith interest at the rate of 15 %. So, as such, in view of aforesaid discussions and material on record, a modified order is passed under Section 15(1) D.R.C. Act, thereby directing the respondent to pay or deposite the arrears of rent @ Rs. 3500/- per month from September 2022 to February 2023 along with simple interest at the rate of 15 % per annum within one month from today and respondent is further directed to continue to pay or deposit rent at the rate of Rs. 3500/- per month on or before the 15 th of each succeeding English Calendar ARC No. 69/2023 Ajit Singh Yadav Vs Reshma Khan Page No. 11 / 12 Digitally signed by RICHA SHARMA RICHA Date:
SHARMA 2026.02.16 15:13:49 +0530 month. It is made clear that the rent already deposited (as per the report of Nazir) will be adjusted.
28. Nazir is directed to file his report on 16.02.2026 regarding compliance of order daed 03.09.2024 passed under section 15 (1) D.R.C. Act as well as the modified order under Section 15 (1) D.R.C. Act passed today. Petitioner is directed to file his bank account statement, if any, qua deposit of rent.
CONCLUSION:-
29. In view of the aforesaid discussion and settled proposition of law, this court has come to the conclusion that the petitioner has satisfied all the ingredients of Section 14(1)(a) of D.R.C. Act, thus the present petition stands allowed.
30. File be consigned to Record Room, after due compliance.
Digitally
signed by
RICHA
RICHA SHARMA
Announced in the open Court SHARMA Date:
2026.02.16
15:13:56
on 16.02.2026 +0530
(Richa Sharma)
Sr. Civil Judge - Cum - RC
THC / Delhi / 16.02.2026
ARC No. 69/2023 Ajit Singh Yadav Vs Reshma Khan Page No. 12 / 12