A person who is entitled to receive rent on behalf of any other person is a landlord within the meaning of Section 2 (e) of the Rent Control Act, 1958.

( 1 ) THIS appeal under Section 39 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (for short the Act ) is directed against the judgment and order dated 22nd May, 1985 of the Rent Control Tribunal dismissing the appellant s application for eviction of the respondent on ground of nonpayment of rent. The Tribunal by the impugned Judgment held that there was no relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties and thus reversed the judgment and order dated 16th January, 1985 of the Additional ; Controller.

( 2 ) BRIEFLY the facts are that on 16th July, 1982 the appellant filed an application for eviction of the respondent under Section 14 (1) (a)oftbeact The appellant has alleged that he is the landlord and the respondent is his tenant in shop premises No. D-89. Khureji Khas. Shahdara. Delhi on a monthly rent of Rs. 250. 00 exclusive of other charges ; the respondent has been in arrears of rent since 1st January, 1978 and be has neither paid nor tendered the arrears of rent in spite of notice of demand dated 11th May. 1982 served upon him. The respondent in the written statement pleaded that there was no relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties; he had purchased the land beneath the premises from Abdul Ghafoor in 1977 and had himself constructed a shop thereon; the premises bear No. C-65 and not D-89 at Khureji Khas, Shahdsra, Delhi. The respondent also alleged that he sent a reply dated 27th May, 1982, to the appellant s notice dated 11th May, 1982. In the replication the appellant reiterated and reaffirmed his allegations.

( 3 ) THE Additional Controller held that the premises in suit bear No. D-89 and not C-65 the respondent was in possession of the shop premises in suit ; Nasiruddin (A. W. 2) was owner landlord of the shop and respondent was his tenant at Rs. 250. 00 per month ; the appellant became owner-landlord by purchase from Nasirruddin ; the respondent was in arrears of rent ; the respondent failed to prove that he had purchased the land beneath the premises in suit. The Additional Controller by order dated 16th January, 1985 directed the respondent to deposit rent from 1st March, 1982 at Rs. 250. 00 per month within one month and if he fails to deposit an order of eviction shall be deemed to have been passed otherwise he will be deemed to have enjoyed benefit under Section 14 (2) of the Act,

( 4 ) ON appeal the Tribunal observed that the evidence led by the appellant was beyond pleadings and held that there was no relationship of landlord and tenant. The order of the Additional Controller was set aside and the application for eviction was dismissed.

( 5 ) LEARNED counsel for the appellant submits that the respondent was tenant of the premises under Nasiruddin (A. W. 2) at Rs. 250. 00 per month and the appellant having purchased the premises from Nasiruddin became owner-landlord. In the alternative he submits that on the basis of the documents on record executed by Nasiruddin if the appellant is not held to be owner of the premises, he is in any case landlord ; the respondent neither paid nor tendered the arrears of rent in spite notice of demand and therefore the appellant is entitled to an order for the eviction of the respondent and the various findings and the observations of the Tribunal in arriving at those findings are perverse.

( 6 ) LEARNED counsel for the parties have taken me through the entire oral and documentary evidence. Briefly the material evidence for deciding this case is as follows, lmtiaz Ali, appellant as A. W. I has deposed that he purchased the shop premises from Nasiruddin who had executed in his favour a general power of attorney dated 1st March 1982 (Mark a ) agreement to sell dated 1st March, 1982 (Ex. A. W. 1/1) affidavit dated 2nd March, 1982 (Ex. A. W. 1/2) a registered receipt for Rs. 10. 000. 00 showing the amount paid by the appellant to Nasiruddin (Ex. A. W. 1/3) ; Nasiruddin had informed the respondent to pay the arrears and future rent to him ; the documen