( 1 ) IN this civil revision brought under Section 25-B (8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act challenging the eviction order dated December 17, 1986, made by an Additional Rent Controller, on the ground of eviction covered by clause (e) of proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 14 of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act ), a learned Single Judge has made a reference on the question of law to be decided by this Bench. The relevant portion of the referermbered order is reproduced as follows :

"the learned Additional Rent Controller has relied on a judgment of this Court in food Corporation of India v. Smt. Usha Bhardwaj 1986 (2) RCJ 52 (1), for the proposition that the Rent Controller has no power to extend the period of limitation for putting in appearance and filing an application for leave to defend. I have been referred to two contrary judgments of this Court. The first one is by M. L. Jam, J. , in Surinder Kumar v. Prem Kumar. , 1980 RLR 621 (2), and the second one is by Rajinder Sachar, J. , in V. N. Sood v. Dr. Gurbachan Singh 1981 RLR (Note) 46 (3), To the same effect is the judgment in Gurditta v. Bal Sarup , 1980 RLR 186 (4 ). In all these c