RC. Rev. No. 127/2010. Case: Pradeep Kumar Seth Vs Rajender Kumar Sethi. High Court of Delhi (India)
| Case Number | RC. Rev. No. 127/2010 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: Mohinder Madan and Shyam Dev Lal, Advs. And For Respondents: A.K Singla, Sr. Adv. and Ashwin Vaish, Adv. |
| Judges | P.K. Bhasin, J. |
| Issue | Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 - Sections 14(1), 25(4), 25B(5), 25B(6), 25B(7) and 25B(8); Rent Acts |
| Judgement Date | July 18, 2011 |
| Court | High Court of Delhi (India) |
Order:
P.K. Bhasin, J.
-
This is a petition under Section 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 against the order dated 25.01.10 passed by the learned Additional Rent Controller whereby the Petitioner-tenant's application for grant of leave to defend the eviction petition in respect of first floor of premises No. H-68, B.K. Dutt Colony, New Delhi (hereinafter to be referred to as "the tenanted premises") filed against him by his landlord (Respondent herein) has been dismissed and eviction order has been passed against the Petitioner.
-
The Petitioner is the brother of the Respondent. The Respondent had filed the eviction petition against the Petitioner on the allegations that he was the owner of the tenanted premises comprising of two rooms, kitchen, latrine and bathroom and he had let out the same to his brother at a monthly rent of Rs. 1500/- w.e.f. 31.03.98 and now he requires the premises in the possession of his brother bona fide for his residence and that of his servant. It was pleaded in the eviction petition by the Respondent that he was residing in the house of his daughter in South Extension and since his daughter wants to sell her house she has requested him to vacate the premises in his occupation in that house. He had no other residential house in Delhi except the tenanted premises in occupation of the Petitioner.
-
Since it was a case of eviction under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 the Petitioner had to seek the leave of the trial Court for defending it and, therefore, he had moved an application seeking the leave. The Petitioner had claimed that he was the joint owner of the tenanted premises along with his brother (Respondent herein) and further that there was no relationship of landlord-tenant between the parties and the document of lease dated 16.03.98 filed by the Respondent had been obtained from him by playing fraud and undue influence by their mother. In order to appreciate effectively the pleas raised by the Petitioner it would be appropriate to re-produce relevant portions from different paras of the application for leave:
-
That there does not exist any relationship of landlord and tenant between the Respondent and the Petitioner. The Applicant/ Respondent is residing in the property in dispute as its co-owner/co-parcener. Late Kaviraj Anand Prakash Sethi, father of the Applicant/Respondent and the Petitioner migrated to Delhi from Lahore at the time of partition of the country in August, 1947 along with his father, brother Shri Sushil Kumar Sethi and their respective family members. Kaviraj Anand Parkash Sethi with the funds provided to him by his father late Lala Mathura Dass Sethi, which was brought by the family from Lahore, paid for the acquisition of a shop-cum-flat No. 3, Main Market, Lodhi Colony, New Delhi, which was allotted to Kaviraj Anand Parkash Sethi vide letter dated October 21, 1982. From the funds provided by late Lala Mathura Dass Sethi the business of Chemist under the name and style of Kaviraj & Company was also started at the said shop cum flat No. 3, Main Market, Lodhi Colony, New Delhi. The father of the Petitioner and the Respondent was employed with M/s. Delhi Chemicals having its Office at Darya Ganj, New Delhi and the said joint family business was looked after by the grandfather of the Petitioner as well as Uncle (Chacha) namely Shri Sushil Kumar Sethi who was a qualified person having a licence for running the shop of Chemist. The father of the Petitioner and the Respondent used to look after the patients in the evening and also helped in managing the affairs of the said joint family business of Chemist.
Shri Anand Parkash Sethi died at Delhi on 30.3.1966 intestate leaving behind besides the Appellant/Respondent and the Petitioner, his wife Smt. Usha Rani Sethi and another son Shri Ravi Kant Sethi as his only legal heirs.
The Applicant/Respondent alone was a minor at the time of demise of his father aged about 6 years.
The Applicant/Respondent completed his diploma in Pharmacy from Hamdard College of Pharmacy in the year 1980 and he was registered as a Pharmacist on 21.11.1980 with Delhi Pharmacy Council and the name of the Applicant/Respondent was added in the Drug Licence No. 15(32)20, 21 as qualified person to run the joint family business run under the name and style of Kaviraj & Co. at shop cum flat No. 3 Main Market, Lodhi Colony, New Delhi and the Applicant/Respondent started looking after the shop under the guidance of his Uncle namely Shri Sushil Kumar Sethi. The Applicant/ Respondent along with his family was residing with his mother Smt. Usha Rani Sethi and the other brother Shri Ravi Kant Sethi in flat No. 3, Main Market, Lodhi Colony, New Delhi while the Petitioner was residing with his wife and step daughter at R-31 South Extension, Part II, New Delhi. The medical practice of the Petitioner did not pick up at Sheikh Sarai, New Delhi and he could not earn adequate sum to maintain routine life as well as pay the rent of the rented premises, therefore, under a family arrangement a decision was taken by the elders including the uncle of the Petitioner and the Respondent i.e. Shri Sushil Kumar Sethi and the Petitioner was advised to shift his practice to the shop cum flat No. 3, Main Market, Lodhi Colony, New Delhi, which the Petitioner did in the year 1982 and he was provided space/cabin in the said shop to pursue his medical practice as a Homeopath.
That the joint family business run under the name and style of Kaviraj & Co. with the efforts and hard work put in by the Applicant/ Respondent, the Petitioner along with his mother and other brother Ravi Kant Sethi proposed to the Applicant/Respondent to shift into a joint family property bearing No. H-68, B.K. Dutt Colony, Jor Bagh Lane, New Delhi, comprising one small room, one kitchen and bath and WC as common which was purchased by the father of the Applicant/Respondent and the Petitioner during his lifetime in the year 1965 out of the ancestral funds provided to him by the grandfather of the Applicant and the Petitioner which they had brought at the time of migration from Lahore, Pakistan to Delhi. The father of the Petitioner and the Applicant/Respondent, however, purchased the said property in the name of Petitioner. The said property has been let out from time to time to different people and the rent from the said property was collected by the father of the Applicant/Respondent and the Petitioner during his lifetime and thereafter by Smt. Usha Rani Sethi, mother of the Applicant and the Respondent herein. The Applicant/Respondent submits that till he was minor, Smt. Usha Rani Sethi, Shri Ravi Kant Sethi and the Petitioner together...
To continue reading
Request your trial