A tenant may not have locus standi to seek a temporary injunction against threatened demolition if the alleged unauthorized construction was put up by the landlord, not the tenant.

( 1 ) THIS revision petition has been filed after petitioner s application for grant of temporary injunction filed under Order 39 Rules 1and2 CPC was dismissed and the appeal filed against that order was also dismissed by the Addl. District Judge, Delhi. Although copy of the plaint in the suit is not available but a reference to the appellate order court makes it clear that the petitioner filed the civil suit contending that he was in occupation of property bearing No. 446, Gali Rajan Kalan, Panja Sharif, Mori Gate, Delhi as a tenant, and that officials of the Municipal Corporation came and threatened to demolish the premises and also to seal them on the ground of there being unauthorised construction. The suit obviously seeks a prohibitory injunction against the Municipal Corporation. Issuance of temporary injunction by means of separate application under Order 39, Rules I and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, was sought in respect to the apprehended action, pending disposal of the suit.

( 2 ) THIS application was dismissed primarily on the ground that the petitioner, as a tenant, had no locus standi to challenge the act of threatened or apprehended demolition, as he did not, in any manner, claim to have put up the alleged unauthorised construction. The appellate court has specifically recorded that there was no dispute before him that the construction sought to be demolished had been put up by the landlord of the premises, and not by the tenant. It was on this situation that both the courts below have held that the petitioner was not entitled to come to the court and seek order of injunction restraining the threatened demolition or sealing of the premises.

( 3 ) IN the revision petition, filed before this Court, the contentions raised are that before action of demolition could be undertaken, a notice to show cause against the proposed action ought to have been served and further that an order of demolition, must be shown to have been passed, in terms of provisions of section 343 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act. In fact, the whole thrust is that the respondent must have shown to the satisfaction of the courts below that such a notice had been served, and order passed.

( 4 ) THE respondent Corporation in reply to the show cause notice has stated in categorical terms that whole of the premises are unauthorised construction and that the show cause notice was issued to the landlord/owner on 8th October, 1990, which was seved by affixation on the premises as the persons present at the site on behalf of the landlord/owner refused to receive the notice on 5th October, 1990. Treating this affixation to be a valid service under the provisions of Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, a demolition order had been passed on 12th October, 1990.

( 5 ) IN face of this positive averment made in the reply,the grievance of the petitioner that no notice of show cause for the proposed demolition was issueed or that- no demolition order was passed does not survive. Under the provisions of section 343 of the Act, it is only the person at whose instance the unauthorised construction is put up, who is entitled to notice of service of order of demolition. The petitioner on his own showing not being such a person, was not prima fade entitled to insist on service on him of either show cause notice or even that of demolition order.

( 6 ) I, therefore, do not find any error in the view taken by the courts below that the petitioner was not entitled to seek order of temporary injunction against the respondent Corporation in respect to demolition in relation to allegedly unauthorised construction, put up by the owner. The application was thus rightly dismissed, and also the appeal.

( 7 ) I, therefore,findnomerit in this revision petition and the same is hereby dismissed. Interim orders issued after filing of the revision petition are vacated.

( 8 ) NO order as to costs.