SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1968 Supreme(Del) 165

High Court Of Delhi
SOHAN LAL LAMBA - Appellant
Versus
S.L.KAPOOR - Respondent
Decided On : 11/01/1968

The Rent Control Tribunal has the power to exempt the filing of a certified copy of the order of the Rent Controller appealed from.

Headnote:

RENT CONTROL - Appeal - Limitation - Filing of certified copy of order appealed from - Power of Rent Control Tribunal to exempt - Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, Ss. 38(3), 56(2)(e) - Delhi Rent Control Rules, 1959, Rr. 17, 23 - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, O. 41, R. 1.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant filed an appeal before the Rent Control Tribunal against the order of the Rent Controller, along with an uncertified copy of the order and an application for exemption from filing a certified copy. The Tribunal admitted the appeal, granted interim stay, and directed notices in the appeal and the stay petition to the respondent. The certified copy of the order was filed by the appellant on 12-2-1968, even though it was ready on 30-12-1967. The Tribunal held that the appeal was barred by time and dismissed it.

Finding of the Court:

The Rent Control Tribunal had the power to exempt the filing of a certified copy of the order of the Rent Controller appealed from. The Tribunal, by admitting the appeal and directing notices in the appeal and the stay petition, should be regarded to have impliedly ordered the application for exemption. The appeal was not barred by limitation.

Issues: 1. Whether the appeal was barred by time? 2. Whether there was no sufficient cause for condoning the delay as held by the Rent Control Tribunal?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. Rule 17 of the Delhi Rent Control Rules, 1959, has to be read along with Rule 23 and section 38(3) of the Act, and on such a reading it is clear that the Tribunal has the power to exempt the filing of a certified copy of the order of the Rent Controller appealed from. 2. The Tribunal, by admitting the appeal and directing notices in the appeal and the stay petition, should be regarded to have impliedly ordered the application for exemption.

Final Decision: The Second Appeal was allowed, the order of the Rent Control Tribunal was set aside, and the case was remanded to the Tribunal for disposal on the merits in accordance with law.

T. V. R. Tatachari, J.

( 1 ) THIS Second Appeal was filed against the order, dated 22-8-1968, of the Rent Control Tribunal, Delhi, in Rent Control Appeal No. 1308 of 1967, dismissing the said appeal on the ground that it was barred by time.

( 2 ) THE respondents herein, S. L. Kapur and A. L. Kapur, filed an application under section 14 (1) (b) and (h) of the Delhi Rent Control Act in the Court of Shri P. K. Bahri, Ist Additional Rent Controller, Delhi, seeking the eviction of the appellant herein, Sohan Lal Lamba, on the ground that the appellant-tenant was allotted ainother residential quarter in the D. E. S. U. Colony, and had shifted there along with his family members, and for more than s months before the filing of the said application neither the appellant-tenant nor any member of his family was residing in the premises in question. Eviction was also sought for on the ground that the appellant-tenant had sub-let or parted with possession of the premises in favour of other persons. By an order, dated 1-12-1967, the learned 1st Additional Rent Controller upheld the contentions of the respondents herein, and directed the appallant herein to vacate, the premises and deliver possession of the same to the respondents herein.

( 3 ) AGAINST that order, the appellant herein preferred TO an appeal, Rent Control Appeal No. 1308 of 1967, to the Rent Control Tribunal, Delhi. When the appeal came up for hearing, a preliminary objection was raised by the respondents herein that the appeal was barred by time. The appellant herein filed an application praying that the appeal be held to have been filed within time, and that in the alternative, the delay of about 13 days in filing the appeal be condoned. Shri M. L. Jain, Rent Control Tribunal, Delhi, by his order, dated 22-8-1968, held that the appeal was barred by time, and that there was no sufficient cause for condoning the delay. The learned Tribunal accordingly dismissed the appeal. It is against that order that the present Second Appeal has been filed. The two questions that arise for determination in this Second Appeal are:-

(1) Whether the appeal was barred by time; and

(2) Whether there was no sufficient cause for condoning the delay as held by the Rent Control Tribunal ?

( 4 ) FOR a proper appreciation of the contentions of the parties on the said two questions, a few facts have to be stated. The order of the learned Rent Controller was passed on 1-12-1967. The appellant herein applied for a certified copy of the order on 2-12-1967 for filing an appeal before the Rent Control Tribunal. As he did not receive the certified copy, and as he wanted to obtain an urgent order of stay of eviction, he filed the appeal before the Rent Control Tribunal against the order of the Rent Controller on 8-12-1967, along with an uncertified copy of the order of the Rent Controller and an application for exemption from filing the certified copy of the said order, dated 1-12-1967, of the Rent Controller. In that application, he stated that the certified copy will be filed as and when obtained. He also filed an application for stay of the operation of the order of the Rent Controller. On 8-12-1967, the Rent Control Tribunal passed an order that the appeal be registered and put up on 12-12-1967 for "scrutiny/stay application. " On 12-12-1967, the case was adjourned to 16-12-1967. On 16-12-1967, the Tribunal admitted the appeal, stayed the operation of the impugned order till further orders, and directed notice of the appeal and the stay application to the opposite party for 15-1-1968. It appears from the order of the Tribunal that Shri S. C. Chhabra, Advocate for the respondents herein, was present before the Tribunal and accepted notice on behalf of the respondents on that date itself. The certified copy of the order of the Rent Controller was ready on 30-12-1967, but it was filed before the Tribunal by the appellant herein on 12-2-1968. On 14-6-1968, the appellant herein filed an application under sectio


















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top