( 1 ) INTERESTING question involved in this matter for adjudication is as to the use of word owner in Section 14 (1) (e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereafter REFERRED TO as act ). Mr Ahiuwalia has contended that Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act in specific terms provides that a contract for sale does not by itself create any interest in or charge on such property and agreement to sell is merely a document creating a right to obtain another document in the form of sale deed to be registered in accordance with law.

( 2 ) BRIEFLY stating the facts of the case are that the property in question i. e. , House No. W-111a, Greater Kailash, Part-I, New Delhi was owned by Shri Sunil Kanta Chakravarty, On 29. 6. 1977 ground floor of the premises was leased out by said Shri Sunil Kanta Chakravarty to the respondent for residential purposes. On 20. 10. 086 said Shri Sunil Kanta Chakravarty agreed to sell aforesaid premises to his brother Shri Suhil Kanta Chakravarty. On 11. 2. 1987 substantial money was paid to Shri Sunil Kanta Chakravarty and agreement was written along with receipt-cum-handing over possession document. There was also a general power of atto