SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Del) 174

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Gurbachan Kaur Sehgal (Dead) Through Lr. - Appellant
Versus
Rakesh Kumar Sharma - Respondent
RSA 52 of 2024
Decided On : 27-03-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Raj Kamal and Ms. Muskan Sidana, Advocates
For the Respondent:Mr. Kamal Kant Jha, Mr. Avinash Singh, Ms. Juhi Mishra and Mr. Manas Tiwari, Advocates (VC)

The court condoned the delay in filing the appeal subject to costs, emphasizing the need to consider the rent agreement in light of the Delhi Rent Control Act.

Headnote:(A) Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Section 5 - Delay in filing appeal - Applications for condonation of delay of 572 days in filing and 36 days in re-filing the appeal were filed - Delay condoned subject to payment of costs of Rs. 10,000/- to the respondent. (Paras 1-4)

(B) Rent Control Act - Applicability - The appeal challenges the First Appellate Court's decision which set aside the Trial Court's decree, failing to consider the rent agreement regarding enhancement of rent. (Paras 7-9)

Facts of the case:
The appellant let out property to the respondent at an enhanced rent of Rs. 5,000/- per month. The Trial Court ruled in favor of the appellant, but the First Appellate Court reversed this decision, citing the need for compliance with the Delhi Rent Control Act.

Findings of Court:
The delay in filing the appeal was condoned with costs imposed on the appellant.

Issues: The main issues include whether the First Appellate Court erred in not considering the rent agreement and the applicability of the Delhi Rent Control Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of considering the rent agreement in determining the validity of the appeal and the necessity of adhering to procedural requirements under the Rent Control Act.

Result: Delay condoned, appeal to be heard on merits.

ORDER :

CM APPLs. 13880 & 13882/2024 (for condonation of delay)

1.The present applications have been filed seeking condonation of a delay of 572 days in filing and 36 days in re-filing the appeal.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the delay occurred due to unavoidable reasons.

3. Learned counsel for the respondent has fairly submitted that the delay may be condoned, subject to costs. Let a cost of Rs. 10,000/- be imposed on the appellant.

4. The delay in filing and re-filing the appeal is condoned, subject to the payment of Rs. 10,000/- to the respondent.

5. The applications stand disposed of.

CM APPL. 13881/2024 (exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

6. The application stands disposed of.

7. The present appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 01.05.2021 in RCA No. 58/2018, titled Rakesh Kumar Sharma vs. Gurbachan Kaur Sehgal. The learned First Appellate Court allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment and decree dated 27.03.2018 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi.

8. Learned counsel for the appellant states that the appellant had let out the subject property to the respondent on rent, which was subsequently enhanced to Rs.5,000/- per month. He submits that the learned Trial Court decreed the suit in favor of the appellant. However, the First Appellate Court failed to consider the rent agreement, which recorded the enhancement of rent, and instead held that the petition should have been filed under the Delhi Rent Control Act.

9. Learned counsel further submits that the present case involves substantial questions of law.

10. Issue notice. Learned counsel for the respondent accepts the notice.

11. Let both the parties file brief written submissions not exceeding five pages [with reference to the PDF page number of the digital record of the Court] along with relevant judgments [with an index of the specific paragraphs of the said decision and the corresponding proposition of law, to be relied on] within four weeks with an advance copy supplied to the opposite party at least a week in advance before the next date of hearing.

12. List on 21.08.2025.

13. Let LCR and ACR in digital form be called on or before the next date of hearing.

CM APPLs. 15061/2024& 38006/2024 (permission to file additional documents on record)

14. Present applications have been filed by the appellant seeking permission to file additional documents on record.

15. Learned counsel for the appellant seeks time to file reply.

16. Let reply be filed within two weeks with an advance copy supplied to the learned counsel for the appellant.

17. List on 21.08.2025.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top