Landlords need only establish a better title than the tenant in eviction proceedings, and the powers of review are confined to addressing patent errors without reappraising previously settled material.

JUDGMENT :

SAURABH BANERJEE, J.

1. The petitioners/ landlords, Hereinafter ‘landlords are all family members who filed two Eviction Petitions, E. Nos.288/2013 and 289/2013 under Section 14 (1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, Hereinafter ‘the Act seeking vacation of the First and Second Floors of property bearing No.1763-1764, Hauz Sui Walan, Chandni Mahal, Delhi-110 006, Hereinafter ‘subject premises on the ground of paucity of residential accommodation for their family, since landlord no.1 in RC. REV.219/2023/ Mr. Amir Khan had a family of six people residing in a tin-shed in the house of his mother/ landlady no.2 and landlord no.1 in RC. REV.220/2023/ Mr. Sajid Khan had a family of four people residing in a rented single room, which were insufficient for the needs of their growing children. The landlords also averred that they had no alternative accommodation for their bona fide residential requirements.

2. Upon service, the respondent/ tenant, Hereinafter ‘tenant in both the eviction petitions filed applications under Section 25B of the Act seeking leave to defend primarily disputing the title of the landlords and stating that the subject premises were purchased by the tenant/ Mr. Inam-Ul-Haq (since deceased) from Mr. Adbul Rasheed s/o Mr. Abdul Wahid Khan (grandfather of the landlords herein) vide General Power of Attorney, Agreement to Sell for a consideration of Rs.2,00,000/- and Will, all dated 03.07.1996. After the said purchase, late Mr. Inam-Ul-Haq had been paying the House Tax, Electricity Bills, etc. qua the subject premises, and subsequently upon his demise, the tenant/ Mr. Aziz-Ur-Rehman s/o late Mr. Inam-Ul-Haq had become the lawful owner thereof. The tenant also denied having ever tendered any rent to the landlords and submitted that the Eviction Petitions were not maintainable.

3. The landlords, in their replies thereto, denied the assertions made by the tenant and submitted that since immovable property could only be transferred through a registered Deed, and the General Power of Attorney and Agreement to Sell filed by the tenant were unregistered, the same did not create any title in his favour. The landlords further reiterated their reliance upon the Sale Deed dated 24.10.1958, Death Certificate of Mr. Abdul Wahid Khan dated 17.01.1984, Death Certificate of Mr. Abdul Sattar dated 22.04.1996, Partition Deed dated 01.04.1999, whereby the subject premises had fallen to their share, rent receipts issued by the landlords to the tenant thereafter and one Rent Agreement dated 07.10.2013 in their favor.

4. After hearing both sides, learned Rent Controller, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, Hereinafter ‘predecessor passed the orders dated 26.02.2019, Hereinafter ‘earlier orders allowing both the Eviction Petitions for identical reasons and holding that since the only contention taken by the tenant was qua the title of the landlords, which the landlords were not required to show absolutely, as they were only to show a better title than that of the tenant, no triable issues was raised by the tenant. The learned predecessor also observed therein that the tenant had admitted being inducted into the subject premises as a tenant(s) in the year 1987, coupled with the documents produced by the landlords being Sale Deed dated 24.10.1958, Partition Deed dated 01.04.1999 and the rent receipts issued by the landlords to the tenant, and found that the landlords had indeed established a better title in their favor than the General Power of Attorney, Agreem