HIMANSHU DAWER Vs. HEMCHAND
LAWS(DLH)-2024-4-1
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Decided on April 01,2024

Himanshu Dawer Appellant
VERSUS
HEMCHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.)By way of this petition brought under proviso to Sec. 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, the petitioner/tenant has assailed order dtd. 31/10/2022 of the learned Additional Rent Controller whereby the eviction petition filed by the present respondents under Sec. 14(1)(e) of the Act was allowed since despite service of summons in prescribed format, the petitioner/tenant did not file any application seeking leave to contest the proceedings. On notice of the present proceedings, the respondents/ landlords entered appearance through counsel. I have heard learned counsel for both sides and examined the digitized record of the learned Additional Rent Controller.
(2.)Briefly stated, the circumstances relevant for present purposes are as follows. The present respondents claiming themselves to be the owners of premises bearing shop No. 158, situated at ground floor of property bearing No. 155-160, Ghee Mandi, Paharganj, Delhi filed eviction petition against the present petitioner under Sec. 14(1)(e) of the Act, pleading that the subject premises were bona fide required by them for commercial purposes. In the impugned eviction order, learned Additional Rent Controller recorded that despite three visits, the process server found the subject premises locked, so he pasted the summons in prescribed format outside the subject premises and since despite service of summons the present petitioner opted not to file any application seeking leave to contest, pleadings of the present respondents are deemed to be admitted, so the present petitioner was liable to be evicted from the subject premises.
(3.)In these proceedings under proviso to Sec. 25B(8) of the Act assailing the impugned eviction order, the basic contention raised on behalf of the petitioner/tenant is that the summons in prescribed format were not duly served insofar as admittedly the alleged service of summons was only through ordinary process and not simultaneously through the registered post as well, which is the requirement of law.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.