JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, T.S.THAKUR
Dina Nath (D) by Lrs. – Appellant
Versus
Subhash Chand Saini – Respondent
JUDGMENT
T.S. Thakur, J. –
1. Leave granted.
2. I have had the privilege of going through the elaborate Order proposed by my Esteemed Brother J.S. Khehar, J. While I entirely agree with the view that the power to strike out the defence vested in the Court under Section 15 (7) of the Delhi Rent Control Act is discretionary and ought to be exercised only when the tenant deliberately, contumaciously or negligently fails to deposit the rent due from him, I have, however, not been able to persuade myself to hold that such deliberate, neglect or contumacious failure has been established against the petitioner-tenant in the instant case so as to justify the exceptional step of the Court striking out his defence at the threshold.
3. The facts giving rise to the controversy have been set out at great length in the judgment of my Erudite Brother. I, therefore, do not consider it necessary to recapitulate the same over again except to the extent it may be necessary in the course of this judgment to do so. Before adverting to the factual matrix relevant to the question of striking out the tenant’s
Nagindas Ramdas v. Dalpatram Ichharam @ Brijram
Ashoka Marketing Ltd. v. Punjab National Bank
M/s Rahabhar Productions Pvt. Ltd. v. Rajendra K. Tandon
Mst. Bega Begum v. Abdul Ahad Khan (Dead) by LRs.
Phiroze Bamanji Desai v. Chandrakant N. Patel
Miss Santosh Mehta v. Om Prakash
Smt. Kamla Devi v. Shri Vasudev
M/s Jain Motor Car Co., Delhi v. Smt. Swayam Prabha Jain
Miss Santosh Mehta v. Om Prakash
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.