The denial of the relationship of landlord and tenant by the defendant and its claim of ownership in respect of the suit property did not bar the suit from being maintainable before the civil court.

JUDGMENT

amit Bansal, J. - I.a. 13172/2019 (of the defendant u/O-VII R-11 of CPC)

1. The present application has been filed on behalf of the applicant/defendant under provisions of Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), seeking rejection of plaint on the ground that the jurisdiction of this Court is barred under Section 50 of the Delhi Rent Control act, 1958 (DRCa) read with Section 11 of the Commercial Courts act, 2015.

2. Brief facts necessary for deciding the present application are as follows:

I. a notice dated 15th May, 2017 was issued by the plaintiffs to the defendant demanding arrears of rent at the rate of Rs.200 per month from 15th June, 2015 till 30th april, 2017 and payment of arrears of property tax amounting to Rs.12,16,786/- in respect of the suit property from the year 2010 to 2017. In the said notice, it was specifically averred that the plaintiffs are the co-owners of the premises bearing No. a-10, Mezzanine Floor, a Block, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001 (hereinafter, referred to as the 'suit property').

II. a reply dated 3rd July, 2017 was issued on behalf of the defendant wherein, it was specifically stated on behalf of the defendant that the defendant is not the tenant of the plaintiffs in respect of the suit property and is in fact having ownership rights in the suit property. The existence of landlord-tenant relationship between the plaintiffs and the defendant in respect of the suit property was specifically denied.

III. a legal notice dated 27th March, 2018 was issued on behalf of the plaintiffs to the defendant in which it was stated that in view of the reply dated 3rd July, 2017, wherein the defendant had denied his status as a tenant in respect of the aforesaid premises, the possession of the defendant was unlawful and the defendant was asked to handover possession of the aforesaid premises.

IV. Thereafter, the present suit was filed seeking inter alia a decree of possession in respect of the suit property and mesne profits. The relevant paragraphs of the plaint are set out below:

'19. That the defendant which earlier was a tenant under the provisions of Delhi Rent Control act, ceased to have the protection of Delhi Rent Control act from the date when instead of paying the rental so demanded by plaintiffs, the defendant claimed its ownership rights while denying the existence of relationship of landlord & tenant between the parties and thus the tenancy/lease which was operational by law in favour of defendant stood extinguished thereby making the occupation of said defendant as illegal and unauthorized in respect of suit premises, actually owned by the plaintiffs.

20. That since the defendant without any force, pressure or coercion voluntarily renounced its status and character of being a protected tenant by claiming itself to be the owner of the suit premises, the tenancy rights in respect of suit premises stood forfeited by virtue of Section 111(g) of Transfer of Property act, 1882 w.e.f. date of Reply of the defendant. as such w.e.f. 03.07.2017, the occupation of the defendant in the suit premises has become unauthorized, illegal and akin to a trespasser and unauthorized occupant.

XXX XXX XXX

26. That the cause of action for filing the present Suit for Recovery of Possession & Mesne Profit arose in favour of the Plaintiffs & against the defendant for the first time on 03.07.2017 when the defendant acting in most frivolous manner while giving Reply to the Notice of Demand of rent, arrears of rent, interest & Property Tax dated 15.05.2017 made by the Plaintiffs, claimed its ownership qua the suit property and simultaneously denied the ownership and landlordship of the plaintiffs, thereby renouncing its status and character of being the protected tenant in the suit property. The cause of action also arose in favour of the plaintiffs when the Plaintiff No. 1 applied under RTI to NDMC to obtain various papers relating to taxation & building Plans of entire property including suit prop