The main legal point established in the judgment is the validity and effect of the Documentation dated 08.08.2000, the evidence presented by the respondent/plaintiff's attorney, and the nullity of the Conveyance Deed dated 03.05.2008 under Section 48 of the Transfer of Property Act.

VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J.

C.M. Appl. No. 49860/2018 (for exemption)

1. Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions.

C.M. stands disposed of.

RFA No. 966/2018 and C.M. Appl. No. 49859/2018 (for stay)

2. This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the defendants in the suit impugning the Judgment of the trial court dated 21.08.2018 by which the trial court has decreed the suit for possession, recovery of arrears of rent and permanent injunction filed by the respondent/plaintiff against the appellants/defendants. As per the plaint, the appellant no. 1/defendant no. 1 was a tenant of the respondent/plaintiff and the last paid rate of rent was Rs. 6,000/- per month taking the premises outside the protection of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958.

3. The facts of the case are that appellant no. 2/defendant no. 2 was the original owner of the suit property being LIG Flat No. 13-B (GF), Block DB situated at G-8 area, Rajouri Garden, Delhi. The appellant no. 2/defendant no. 2 sold the suit property to the respondent/plaintiff for a consideration of Rs. 4,25,000/- in terms of the usual Documentation dated 08.08.2000, and this documentation consists of the agreement to sell, power of attorney, will, receipt, etc. Out of the various documents executed on 08.08.2000 by the appellant no. 2/defendant no. 2 in favour of the respondent/plaintiff, two documents being the Power of Attorney and the Will are duly registered with the Sub-Registrar. The respondent/plaintiff in terms of the Documentation dated 08.08.2000 received actual, physical and vacant possession of the suit property. Later on 13.10.2000, the appellant no. 1/defendant no. 1, who is the son of appellant no. 2/defendant no. 2, asked the respondent/plaintiff for a tenancy of the suit property in his favour at Rs. 3,500/- per month. Accordingly, a Rent Agreement, Ex.PW1/5, was executed by the appellant no. 1/defendant no. 1 in favour of the respondent/plaintiff. Rentals were paid till 15.02.2001 and rent receipts were also issued by the respondent/plaintiff in favour of the appellant no. 1/defendant no. 1, and these rent receipts are duly counter signed by the appellant no. 1/defendant no. 1. Rent in March, 2004 was increased to Rs. 6,000/- per month when an additional room in the front of the suit property was also let out to the appellant no. 1/defendant no. 1. The enhanced rent at Rs. 6,000/- per month was paid from April, 2004 to August, 2004 and thereafter the appellants/defendants stopped paying the rent. A Legal Demand Notice was issued on 23.08.2007, whereafter the appellant no. 1/defendant no. 1 handed over a cheque bearing no. 159032 dated 15.09.2007 drawn on Syndicate Bank for a sum of Rs. 2,16,000/- towards the arrears of rent but this cheque was dishonoured with the remarks of no balance and signatures differing. Another Notice dated 10.01.2008 was served upon the appellant no. 1/defendant no. 1 and the appellant no.1/defendant no. 1 issued another cheque bearing no. 848606 dated 06.02.2008 for a sum of Rs. 2,46,000/- drawn on ICICI bank for rental arrears upto 15.12.2007. This cheque was also returned dishonoured with the endorsement of insufficient funds. Accordingly, the subject suit for possession, decree for recovery of arrears of rent and for mesne profits was filed.

4. The appellants/defendants filed their written statement. It was denied that there existed a relationship of landlord and tenant between respondent/plaintiff and appellant no. 1/defendant no. 1. It was pleaded that the appellants/defendants were the owners of the property and continued to be the owners and in possession of the suit property. In the written statement it was denied that the ownership of the suit property was transferred to the respondent/plaintiff by Documentation dated 08.08.2000 for a consideration of Rs. 4,25,000/-. Issuing of the cheques by the appellant no. 1/defendant no. 1 in favour of the respondent/plaintiff was denied.

5. Aft