JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Leave granted.
(2.) This appeal is directed against the final judgment and order
dated 23rd of January, 2007 passed by the High Court of Delhi in
CM [M] No.126 of 2007 whereby the eviction of the appellants
from a shop bearing No. III-1/9, Gopi Nath Bazar, Delhi
Cantonment, Delhi (in short "the suit shop") was affirmed on the
ground of subletting under Section 14 [1] [b] of the Delhi Rent
Control Act, 1958 (for short "the Act").
(3.) The appellant no.1 was inducted as a tenant in the year 1956
by the erstwhile owners of the suit shop, viz., Som Nath and
Mohinder Nath. He was all along in continuous possession of the
suit shop and was conducting the business from the same along
with his brother Chunni Lal of Chunni Lal and Sons under the
name and style of M/s Mitra Book Depot. The rent receipts
issued by the landlord were in the name of M/s Mitra Book Depot
as tenant at the rate of Rs.65/- per month. Subsequently, a
business was started in a portion of the suit shop in the name of
M/s. Mitra Stores and M/s. Lucky Confectioners. In the year
2000, Som Nath and Mohinder Nath sold the suit shop to one Anil
Anand. However, the rent of the suit shop was continued to be
paid to Som Nath and Mohinder Nath by the appellant no.1 upto
the month of September 2000. Thereafter, the rent was deposited
by the appellant no.1 in the court in different proceedings. On 20th
of October, 2000, Anil Anand sold the suit shop to the respondent
by a registered deed of sale. However, the appellant no.1 went on
depositing the rent in the name of the original landlord. Finally, on
or about 1st of February, 2002, the respondent filed an eviction
petition under Section 14 [1][b] of the Act on the ground of
subletting before the Rent Controller, Delhi. According to the
respondent, although the tenancy was given to the appellant no.1 in
the name of M/s Mitra Book Depot but subsequently, the appellant
no.1 had sublet the suit shop to the appellant Nos. 2 to 4 who were
carrying on the business in a portion of the suit shop in the name of
M/s Mitra Stores and M/s Lucky Confectioners. Accordingly, the
respondent sought for eviction of the appellants on the ground of
subletting. A written statement was filed by the appellants denying
the material allegations made in the eviction petition filed before
the Rent Controller, Delhi by the respondent. After the issues were
framed and the evidence was adduced, the Rent Controller held on
facts that the appellant No.1 had sublet a portion of the suit shop in
which the business in the name of M/s Mitra Stores and M/s Lucky
Confectioners was carried on by the appellant Nos. 2 to 4 and,
therefore, the appellants were liable to be evicted under Section 14
[1][b] of the Act. The Rent Controller passed the order of eviction
by holding, inter alia, that the case of subletting was duly proved as
from the evidence on record, both oral and documentary, it was
clear that an independent business was run by the appellant Nos. 2
to 4 and that they were in exclusive possession of a portion of the
suit shop. Feeling aggrieved, the appellants filed an appeal before
the Rent Control Tribunal, which also dismissed the same by
affirming the findings of the Rent Controller. Against this order of
the Rent Control Tribunal, the appellants filed a writ petition
before the High Court of Delhi and the High Court by the
impugned judgment also dismissed the same. Aggrieved by the
aforesaid judgment and order of the High Court, the instant special
leave petition has been filed, in respect of which leave has already
been granted.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.