Delhi High Court
Gurbachan Singh Awla vs Rajinder Singh & Anr. on 1 March, 2000
Equivalent citations: 85(2000)DLT334, 2000(56)DRJ204, 2000 A I H C 2547, (2001) 1 RENTLR 577, (2000) 2 RENCR 291, (2001) 1 RENCJ 69, (2000) 85 DLT 334
Author: Madan B. Lokur
Bench: Madan B. Lokur
ORDER Madan B. Lokur, J.
1. The Petitioner is a tenant on the first floor of property bearing No. F-119, East of Kailash, New Delhi. The Respondent claim to be the owners of this property and the landlords of the Petitioner.
2. The Respondents had filed an eviction petition under Clause (e) of the proviso to Section 14(1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The case of the Respondents was that the suit premises were originally owned by one Smt. Krishna Kumari. She had sold the entire property to the Petitioners by a conveyance deed executed on 24th October, 1996 but the sale was with effect from 18th November, 1992
3. The Petitioner filed an application alongwith an affidavit before the learned Additional Rent Controller seeking leave to defend the eviction petition. He denied the title of the Respondents. According to the Petitioner, Smt. Krishna Kumari had sold the property to Jagdish Arora and Uma Arora. She had sent a notice to this effect to the Petitioner. Jagdish Arora had also confirmed the transaction by a notice dated 9th October, 1992 sent by his advocates. The Petitioner also stated that as per the eviction petition itself the conveyance deed was executed in favour of the Respondents only on 24th October, 1996 and as such, in view of the provisions of Section 14(6) of the Act the eviction petition was not maintainable.
4. By the impugned order dated 22nd October, 1999, the learned Additional Rent Controller declined to grant leave to the Petitioner to contest the eviction petition and thereby ordered the eviction of the Petitioner from the suit premises. The petitioner preferred Revision Petition in this Court and by an order dated 14th February, 2000 I issued notice limited to the question of the maintainability of the eviction petition in the face of Section 14(6) of the Act.
5. Learned counsel for the parties addressed arguments on 21st February, 2000 limited to this question but they had ecessarily to advert to the facts of the case including the various documents on record.
6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner drew my attention to the conveyance deed dated 24th October, 1996 which specifically mentions in the penultimate paragraph that the "transfer shall be deemed to have come into force with effect from the date of registration of this deed". This is quite contrary to what has been stated in the eviction petition. It is not clear when the conveyance deed was registered but even if it is taken to have been registered on the date of its execution that is, 24th October, 1996, in view of Section 14(6) of the Act, it appears that an eviction petition under Clause (e) of the proviso to Section 14(1) of the Act could not have been filed for a period of five years from October, 1996. Learned counsel for the Respondents did contend that the conveyance relates back to 18th November, 1992. Prima facie, this does not appear to be so, but this is something which will have to be determined by the learned Additional Rent Controller.
7. Under the circumstances, I think it would have been appropriate for the learned Additional Rent Controller to have granted leave to the Petitioner to contest the eviction petition because there does appear to be a substantial doubt about the date of the transfer of the property in favour of the Respondents and, therefore, the maintainability of the eviction petition.
8. Accordingly, I am of the view that the impugned order dated 27th October, 1999 is liable to be set aside and the Petitioner is entitled to grant of leave to defend the eviction petition filed by the Respondents.
9. It is made clear that nothing stated hereinabove will be considered as a finding on the merits of the case.
10. The petition is accordingly, allowed. There will be no order as to costs.
11. The parties are directed to appear before the learned Additional Rent Controller on 13th March, 2000.