A tenant who acquires vacant possession of a residence, whether by purchase or by rent, is liable to be ejected from the tenanted premises under section 14(1)(h) of the Delhi Rent Control Act.

( 1 ) THIS second appeal under section 39 of Delhi Rent Control Act (No. 59 of 1958), hereinafter REFERRED TO as the Act filed by Sham Sunder is directed against the order of Rent Control Tribunal, Delhi, affirming on appeal the order of the Controller whereby an order for ejectment of the appellant from the premises in dispute was made in favour of Khan Chand, respondent.

( 2 ) THE brief facts of the case are that the appellant is occupying the premises in dispute, which consist of one room, a tin shed, a store and a terrace, situated in Basti Harphul Singh, Delhi, as a tenant of the respondent on a monthly rent of Rs. 8. The respondent made an application for ejectment of the appellant under section 14 of the Act on the allegation that the appellant had acquired vacant possession of a residence at 9, Kishan Ganj, Delhi.

( 3 ) THE application was resisted by the appellant who denied that he had acquired vacant possession of a residence at Kishan Ganj. According to the appellant, he and the other members of his family including his brother and widowed mother, were residing in the suit premises as displaced persons from 1948. The appellant s brother got married in 1949 and had three children. The appellant had four children and the entire family consisted of twelve members. As the premises in dispute consisted of one small room and were insufficient for the members of his family, the appellant got one small barsati in Kishan Ganj for accommodating the family. The whole of the family was in occupation of both the premises. According to the appellant the expansion of the members of the family necessitated the getting of additional accommodation, and this fact did not amount to acquiring vacant possession of a residence as contemplated by law.

( 4 ) THE Controller held that the appellant had acquired vacant possession of a residence and as such ordered his ejectment. The order of the Controller, as stated above, was affirmed on appeal by the Tribunal. Clause (h) of the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 14 of the Act, under which the order for the ejectment of the appellant has been made, provides that an order for recovery of the permises may be made on the ground-

"that the tenant has, whether before or after the commencement of the Act, built, acquired vacant possession of, or been allotted, a residence. "in the present case the Controller appointed Shri K. L. Sawhney as Local Commissioner to visit the premises at No. 9, Kishen Ganj. Delhi, and he found thut the appellant was in possession of those premises which consisted of one living room, one bath room, one kitchen one latrine and an open space. This is a complete set of residence according to the standard and mode of living of the appellant because the premises in dispute were, if anything, less spacious than the new premises taken on rent by him in Kishen Ganj. The appellant could thus be said to have acquired possession of another place for his residence.

( 5 ) MR. Misra on behalf of the appellant has argued that the appellant took the premises in Kishen Ganj on rent because his younger brother had got married and as a result of birth of children the strength of the families of the appellant and his brother had gone up to twelve. The necessity of taking the premises in Kishen Ganj on rent aros3, it is submitted, because the premises in dispute had become insufficient for the needs of the family of the appellant. In this respect I am of the view that if the premises in dispute were not sufficient for the requirement of the family of the appellant and he was on that account impelled to take other premises, he should have vacated the prerniaes in dispute. The underlying object of enacting clause (h) of the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 14 of the Act was that the tenant should not have more than one premises for his residence in these days of housing shortage. In case the tenant has taken on reat any premises for his residence and he thereafter acquire