Judgment

VERMA, J.:- Leave granted.

2. The landlord Shri Shiv Chander Kapoor as preferred this appeal by special leave against the judgment dated August 3, 1987 passed by the Delhi High Court in S.A.O. No.393 of 1986 whereby the High Court dismissed the landlords appeal against the order dated October 14, 1986 of the Rent Control Tribunal affirming in appeal the order dated August 9, 1985 of the Rent Controller dismissing the landlords application dated October 12, 1983 for restoration of possession of the premises let out for residence, to the tenant Amar Bose for the limited period of three years w.e.f. June 8, 1980 under S. 21 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred as the Act). The true scope of the enquiry contemplated when the tenant assails validity of the Rent Controllers permission granted under section 21 of the Act for creation of a tenancy for limited period arises for determination in the present case.

3. The premises is the second floor of the building bearing No. 19/10, Old Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi comprising of two rooms, a kitchen, bathroom and lavatory let out for residence on a monthly rent of Rs. 800/- apart from electricity and water charges. The landlord offered to let out the premises for three years only w.e.f. June 8, 1980 for the reason that it would be needed by his family thereafter when his son got married, to which the tenant consented. Accordingly, by an agreement in writing between the parties the premises was so let out for the limited period of three years w.e.f. June 8, 1980 with the permission of the Rent Controller obtained under S. 21 of the Act. The order of the Rent Controller is as under:

"In view of the statements of the parties made above, I am satisfied that there is no collusion or fraud. I am also satisfied that the petitioner does not require the suit premises for a limited period of three years. Permission, therefore, is hereby granted to the petitioner Sh. Shiv Chander Kapoor to let out his premises No. 19/ 10, situated at Old Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi, the details of which are given in the site plan Ext. AI to the respondent for residential purposes for a limited period of three years with effect from 8-6-1980".

4. On failure of the tenant Amar Bose to restore possession of the premises to the landlord on expiry of the period of limited tenancy, an application dated October 12, 1983 was filed by the landlord before the Rent Controller praying for execution of the aforesaid order by delivery of vacant possession of the premises to the landlord. The tenant filed his objection to the execution application which was replied by the landlord. The Rent 328 Controller by order dated August 9, 1985 rejected the landlords application taking the view that the permission granted under S. 21 of the Act was invalid so that the tenant could not be evicted on expiry of the period of three years. The landlords further appeal to the Rent Control Tribunal and then to the Delhi High Court failed. Hence this further appeal.

5. The Rent Controller upheld the tenants objection that the landlords son being aged only about 19 or 20 years on the date of expiry of the period of limited tenancy while the minimum age prescribed by law for marriage being 21 years, the ground that the premises would be needed on the sons marriage after three years was untenable. On this basis it was held that creation of tenancy for the limited period of three years amounted to fraud and misrepresentation by the landlord rendering invalid the premission granted under S. 21 of the Act. This view has been upheld by the Rent Control Tribunal and then the Delhi High Court, treating the grant of permission by Controller to be mechanical and without application of mind. The tenant also contended. that the landlord was in possession of the remaining building which comprises of sufficient accommodation to meet the bona fide need of the landlords family; and that the premises were constructed in 1972 and the second floor