ORDER:— Having heard Mr. Garg, learned counsel in support of this case that there is serious infirmity in the findings arrived at by the Rent Controller as well as by the High Court inasmuch as they have not taken into consideration that an application under Section 14(1)(e) of the Rent Control Act was pending and the Rent Controller granted leave to the petitioner to defend and the same is pending in this Court. In the meantime, however, the admitted fact is that on 1 st December, 1985 the petitioner i.e., the landladys husband died and she became widow. It is also not disputed that in 1988 Section 14D was inserted in the Rent Control Act which confers special benefit on the widow to apply for an order or decree for recovery of possession of any premises against her tenant. The landlady admittedly applied for recovery of possession of the premises in question on 3rd July, 1989 i.e. within one year from the date of enforcement of the provisions of Section 14D as provided in the said Act. Therefore, the contention about delay in making the application is of no substance and also there is no merit in it. The second submission which was made by Mr. Garg, with great emphasis and veheme