Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
NAVIN CHAWLA
Dev Chand Jain – Appellant
Versus
Sukesh Chand Gupta – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to eviction under rent control act. (Para 2) |
| 2. claim of full rent payment not validated. (Para 3) |
| 3. court affirms tribunal's findings on rent issue. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. petition dismissed with no costs awarded. (Para 6) |
JUDGMENT
Navin Chawla, J. (Oral)
CM APPL. 7488/2021 (Exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
CM(M) 162/2021 & CM APPL. 7487/2021
2. This petition has been filed challenging the order dated 19.09.2020 passed by the learned Rent Control Tribunal in RCT No. 126/2016, allowing the appeal of the respondent herein in challenge to the order dated 22.08.2015 of the learned Additional Rent Controller, which in turn had dismissed the Eviction Petition filed by the respondent herein filed under Section 14 (1)(a) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the `Act').
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Rent Control Tribunal has failed to appreciate that on receipt of the demand notice dated 24.03.2006 from the respondent, the petitioner had tendered the full amount of the legally recoverable rent along with 15% interest per annum thereon by way of a Money Order. On refusal of the
Full payment of rent along with applicable interest is a prerequisite under the Delhi Rent Control Act; failure to substantiate this leads to eviction.
The court upheld the respondents' protection under Section 14(2) of the rent control statute, affirming that minor defaults in rent payment do not constitute grounds for eviction.
The exercise of discretion under Section 15(7) of the Act is discretionary and depends on contumacious or deliberate default, as held by the Supreme Court.
Non-payment of rent and lack of substantiation of defense claims do not warrant protection under eviction laws, emphasizing the importance of statutory notice compliance.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's limited jurisdiction to re-appreciate evidence as an Appellate Court and the application of legal principles from relevant case laws in....
The failure of the tenant to deposit the rent under Section 27 of the Act, after the landlord's refusal to accept the tendered rent, makes the tenant liable for eviction under Section 14(1)(a) of the....
Premature filing of an eviction petition does not cause prejudice to the tenant if the tenant had exercised the option to pay the arrears of rent within the stipulated time. The first default in comp....
Non-payment of rent and failure to prove the nature of possession of the alleged sub-tenant can lead to eviction under the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958.
The court emphasized the importance of diligently pursuing legal remedies and the need to avoid acting contumaciously in the context of eviction proceedings under the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958.
A tenant's claim of payment must be substantiated by evidence without necessitating prior inclusion in pleadings; the eviction application was dismissed due to lack of grounds.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
