Legal representatives may only adopt defenses of the deceased in eviction proceedings and cannot file new applications inconsistent with prior defenses.

JUDGMENT

Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)--This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 3rd November, 2022 passed by the ld. ARC (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in RC ARC No.584/2017 titled "Kamla Gupta v. Nirmala Nath@Gupta", and seeks setting aside of the proceedings in the said eviction case, being RC ARC No.584/2017. By the impugned order, the ld. ARC has dismissed the Petitioner's application seeking permission to file fresh leave to defend under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter, "DRC Act").

3. The prayer in the present petition reads as under:

"(a) Issue writ of certiorari and/or any other appropriate writ/order(s)/direction(s) to quash/set aside the proceedings in Eviction Case No. 584 of 2017 pending final adjudication before Learned JSSC-CCJ-ARC (Pilot Court), (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in view of the grave inherent jurisdiction defects that have crept into the said case;

(b) Pass such further order(s)/direction(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case in the interest of justice."

4. The background of the present case is that an eviction petition was filed by the Respondent herein - Smt. Kamla Gupta against the mother of the Petitioner herein - Smt. Nirmala Devi (hereinafter, "Original Tenant") in respect of property bearing Municipal No.4911, Plot No.98, Block R, Ward No.11, Darya Ganj, New Delhi. The said petition has been filed seeking eviction of the Original Tenant. Vide order dated 6th July, 2017, summons were issued in the said eviction petition. Thereafter, an application was filed on behalf of the Original Tenant seeking leave to defend. The said leave to defend application was considered by the Court, and upon leave being granted, the written statement has also been filed by the Original Tenant. Evidence has also been concluded on behalf of the parties. At that stage, the Original Tenant passed away on 8th February, 2021. Accordingly, the daughter of the Original Tenant and the Petitioner herein - Smt. Ilashree Nath Gupta was impleaded as the legal heir of the Original Tenant.

5. Thereafter, the newly impleaded legal heir of the Original Tenant moved an application under Section 151 CPC, seeking permission to file leave to defend under Section 14(1)(e) of the DRC. The said application has been rejected by the ld. ARC, vide impugned order dated 3rd November, 2022, which reads as under:

"Matter is fixed for orders on the application u/s 151 of CPC moved on behalf of LR Illashree Nath Gupta on 21.09.2021 seeking direction to file leave to defend u/s 14(1)(e) of DRC Act. It is stated in the application that vide order dated 27.07.2022, Sh. Illashree Nath Gupta was arrayed as the LR of deceased respondent and after arraignment as a LR, she realize that adjudication of the present case shall not be legally binding due to serious defect in the present case since the deceased respondent never filed leave to defend application and summons were never issued u/s 14(1)(e) of DRC Act to the deceased respondent. Therefore, in order to give legitimacy to the proceeding, LR Illashree Nath Gupta be permitted to file leave to defend application mandate of 14(1)(e) of DRC Act. It is further stated that no prejudice will be caused to the opposite party and filing of leave to defend application will assist the Court in adjudication of the present case.

The application was highly opposed by the Ld. Counsel for petitioner on the ground that LR Illashree Nath Gupta has stepped into the shoes of original party i.e. respondent Nirmala Nath Gupta (now deceased) but that does not entitle