( 1 ) IT is said that statute is an edict of the legislature and the conventional way of interpreting or construing a statute is to seek the "intention" of its maker. The duty of judicalure is to act upon the true intention of the Legislature. Delhi Rent Control Act. 1958 (in short (he Act) was amended by the amendment Act 1988. Special provisions like Sections 14-A to 14-D were added to provide rights to certain classified landlords in order to enable them to recover immediate possession of their premises for their residence.

( 2 ) THE petitioner a tenant inhouseno. B-126. Sarvodaya Enclave, New Delhi, has denied the relationship of landlord and tenant between him and the respondent No. 1. The question raised is whether a nominee enrolled os member under Section 26 of the Delhi Co-operative Society Act or a legal heir of the deceased member would be the landlord of the tenanted premises. In order to appreciate his challenge to the impugned order, we have to have the facts before us.

( 3 ) MRS. Manju. respondent No. 1 herein, moved the Rent Controller by a petiti under Section 14-D. read with Section 25-B of the Act for recovery of possession of the premises consisting of two bedrooms, one sitting-cum-dining, two bath rooms-cum- lavatory, kitchen, varandah and front lawn being premises No. B-126, Sarvodya Enclave, New Delhi. The said house was constructed on a plot of land admeasuring 601 sq. yards leased by the President of India in favour of Government Employees Sarvodya Co-operative House Building Society (hereinafter REFERRED TO to as the Society) and sub leased by it to Shri Bhagirath Lal Chaudhary (maternal grand father of the respondent No. 1 ). The tenancy commenced on 1st July,1970. Rent note was executed on 6th July, 1970 by the present petitioner in favour of late Sh. B. L. Chaudhary, landlord of the tenanted premises. The premises was let out for residential purposes. Sh. B. L. Chaudhary died on 20th June 1975. He was survived by his wife Smt. Kesar Devi, who was nominated as a person entitled to succecd as member of the Soccity by her late husband. Said Kesar Devi nominated Shri Arun Kumar respondent No. 7 herein as her nominee to succeed as member of the Soceity. Kesar Devi died on 30th April 1976. B. L,chaudhary and his wife Kesar Devi had only one child namely Smt. Shakuntala Devi (mother of the respondent) who pre-deceased her parents on 13th October 1969. Hence, after the death of Kesar Devi. present respondents inherited their interest in this property by operation of law. They became owners / landlords of the premises in question. They continued to be joint owners till 1st October 1985. on which dale they orally effected a partition of the properties including the premises in question. By virtue of the said partition, respondents I to 4 herein became exclusive owners/ landlords of the tenanted premises and respondents 5 to 7 alongwith their father Shri Rameshwar Dayal became owner of House No. D-13-A/10. Model Town, Delhi. This oral partition was reduced to writing on 23th October 1985. However after the death of their father Shri Rameshwar Dayal another oral partition took place amongst the present respondents on 23rd January 1988. The terms of which were reduced into writing on 25th January 1988. This partition was duly acted upon and the property in question was mutated infavour of the present respondents 1 to 4intherecords of Delhi Development Authority (in short the D. D. A.) and of the Society as well as of the Delhi Municipal Corporation (in short M. C. D.) Thus, present respondents 1 to 4 became co-owners/ landlords of the premises in question.

( 4 ) PRESENT respondent No. 3 was in need of the accommodation as there was paucity of accommodation at Model Town. Hence sought eviction of this house from the present petitioner by Filing an eviction petition under Section 14 (l) (e)of the Act. Since he had no suitable accommodation available for him and his family, he had to rent out houses