1997 Supreme(Del) 1026

High Court Of Delhi
DIMPLE PRIVATE LIMITED - Appellant
Versus
HARISH KUMAR AGGARWAL - Respondent
Civil Miscellaneous (Main) 3 of 1990
Decided On : 12/19/1997

Headnote:Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order 23 Rule 3 — Application of — Local law — Special statute barring the application of the Code — Withdrawal of an application does not bar the land lord from moving another petition.

       Slum Areas (Improvement & Clearance) Act, 1956 - Section 19(l)(a) — Grant of permission — Considerations for — Acquisition of another property by the tenant — Permission for eviction rightly granted.

       Held:

       The Competent Authority in the instant case on the presentation of a petition under Section 19 of the Act for grant of permission to initiate eviction proceedings against the petitioner issued a notice for service on the petitioner at the address 1564, Bhagirath Place, Chandni Chowk, Delhi, i.e., the disputed property. The process server in connection therewith visited the disputed property and found that the petitioner were no more there as they had shifted to K-9, Connaught Circus, New Delhi (vide report of the process server dated February 3, 1986 on the back of the notice — Annexure R-4). This fact further becomes crystal clear from the notice placed on the file of this Court by the petitioner themselves that the office of the petitioner company was situated No.9, K Block, Con-naught Circus, New Delhi during the period from June 26, 1982 to November 30, 1984. Mr. Sat Pal Sood, Director of the petitioner company, has also admitted this fact (vide para 5 of his affidavit dated January 13, 1988). According to him one of the Directors of the petitioner company is also a Director of other companies who have got their office at K-9, Connaught Circus, New Delhi. Hence at times the mail addressed to the petitioner Company or to their Director is received at K-9, Connaught Circus, New Delhi. The same thing has been reiterated in para 4 of the written statement filed before the Competent Authority dated August 5, 1986. Thus, it can be safely concluded from above that the petitioner Company have acquired another premises bearing No. K-9, Connaught Circus, New Delhi.

       It brings me to the acquisition of the premises at Rajokri, Tehsil Mehrauli Respondent No. 1 has placed on record a photocopy of the extract from the telephone directory which shows mat the telephone bearing No.393849 is in the name of the petitioner and is installed at village Rajokri, Tehsil Mehrauli, New Delhi — 110030. The petitioner have not challenged the fact that the telephone bearing No.393849 has been installed at Rajokri, Tehsil Mehrauli, New Delhi. In fact the petitioner have tried to explain the shifting of the said telephone number to Rajokri by saying that the said telephone number had been lent to M/s Living Media Ltd. The mere lending of the said telephone to the said company would not make any difference and would not create any interest of the petitioner in the disputed property (vide para 6 of the reply affidavit filed by Mr. Sat Pal Sood before the Competent Authority on January 29, 1989).

       The said contention of the learned Counsel is without any merit inasmuch as Rule 429 of the Rules for Indian Telephone provides that no subscriber shall be entitled to transfer the telephone withouts the permission of the Telephone Authority. Furthermore, it is amply clear from the telephone directory that the said telephone number is in the name of the petitioner at village Rajokri, Tehsil Mehrauli, New Delhi.

       Section 19(1)(a) — Protection to company — Permissibility — Company claimed to be running in losses — Protection to a company which is commercial and financial venture is not within the scope of the provisions of the Act.

       Admittedly the petitioner are a company. Thus, they are a juristic person. A company is formed when certain persons join hands with a view to carrying some commercial or industrial undertaking. Thus, it can naturally be formed by those persons who have got sufficient funds to carry on their business. A company cannot be run by poor persons with no financial means to run the same. Hie object and the purpose for the enactment of the Slum Areas (Improvement & Clearance) Act, 1956 was to clear the slums and to provide protection to poor tenants against harassment at the hands of landlords who bring forward and initiate proceedings for their eviction.

       The Slum Act was enacted for giving protection to poor individual tenants who have small means and cannot afford to get alternate accommodation outside the slum area or within the shun if evicted. If a couple, of persons with substantial means float a company which goes into losses, even if they are evicted from the premises, they cannot create \ slums, particularly when the same persons own other concerns which also have offices at different places.

       Section 19(1)(a) — Withdrawal of permission — Effect of — Provisions of the Code have no application — Withdrawal of an application does not bar the land lord from moving another petition.

       Proceedings under Section 19 of the Act for grant of permission are of a summary nature. Tints the time — consuming provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure are not to be invoked in such proceedings. In case the provisions of the Code are made applicable to such proceedings, in that eventuality it would not be possible to dispose of such petitions at an early date. The underlying idea behind the enactment of the Slum Areas (Improvement & Clearance) Act, 1956 is to provide for the improvement and clearance of slum areas in certain Union Territories, and for the protection of poor tenants in. such areas from eviction. The civil courts have been debarred from taking cognizance in respect of any matter which the Competent Authority or any other person is empowered under this Act to determine and no injunction shall be granted by any Court or other Authority in respect of any action taken or to be taken in pursuance of any power conferred by or under this Act (vide Section 37 A of the Act).

       It is manifest from above that while enacting the said Act an effort was made to streamline the procedure which is to be adopted in matters with regard to slum areas and with the said end in view the above said Act was passed. A matter very much akin to the matter m hand came up before a Division Bench of this Court as reported in Ashoka Marketing Ltd. v. B.D.Gupta, 1976 R L R 217. It was observed while disposing of the said matter (vide para 6).

       The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is meant to provide for adjudication of labour disputes in a simple manner free from legal technicalities. In Guest. Keen. Williams Private Limited v. P.J. Sterling. the Supreme Court observed that in industrial disputes legal technicalities should be avoided as far as it was reasonably possible to do so and industrial tribunals should be cautious in applying even such otherwise solitary principles such as estoppel and acquiescence in proceedings before them. The same reason may operate against the application of the principle underlying Order XXIII rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure to such proceedings as also to the proceedings under the Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1956".

       It was further observed in para 12(C) of the said judgment. "The order "dismissed as withdrawn" cannot be regarded as final for the simple reason that the dismissal was only because the petition was withdrawn obviously because the petitioner did not wish the merits to be decided and wanted to file a fresh petition on the same cause of action. As the court or the tribunal did not choose to bar, the filing of a fresh petition, no such power can be implied. The court or the tribunal contemplated the possibility of a fresh suit or petition being filed when it allowed the withdrawal of the earlier suit or petition. It was not necessary for the court or the tribunal to expressly grant permission to file afresh suit or petition....................".

       Tints it can be safely inferred from above that the second petition was not barred.