Ramesh Kumar Aggarwal
Vs. Rani Ravindran & ANR.  INSC 921 (8 May 2009)
IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.3405 OF 2009 (Arising out
of SLP (C) No. 12441 of 2008) Ramesh Kumar Aggarwal ..........Appellant Versus
Rani Ravindran and Ors. ........Respondents
appeal, inter-alia challenging the judgment and the order passed by the High
Court in RCR No.18 of 2008 dated 29.02.2008, wherein the Court has rejected the
revision petition and confirmed the order passed by the Additional Rent
Controller, Delhi in Case No. E-17/05 dated 20.11.2007, rejecting the tenant's
application seeking leave to defend the eviction petition and has passed an
order of eviction against the tenant/appellant.
respondent herein who claims to be the landlord of the premises has filed
eviction petition against the appellant/tenant on several grounds, including
for her bonafide use and occupation before Addl. Rent Controller, Delhi. After
receipt of summons from the said authority, the appellant/tenant had filed an application
seeking leave to defend. The said application is rejected by the Addl. Rent
Controller and the said order is confirmed by the High Court while rejecting
the revision petition filed by the tenant. That is how the tenant is before us
in this appeal.
have heard the learned counsel for the parties to the lis and we have also
perused the application filed by the tenant seeking leave to defend in the
eviction petition filed by the landlord. In our opinion, the Addl. Rent
Controller ought not to have rejected the application, since in our opinion,
the tenant has framed and formulated several triable issues which requires to
be considered at the time of trial. Therefore, in our view, the High Court was
not justified in rejecting the revision petition filed against the order passed
by the Addl. Rent Controller, Delhi.
the result, we allow this appeal and set aside the impugned order passed by the
High Court and the Addl. Rent Controller, Delhi in Case No.E-17/05 dated
20.11.2007 and direct the Rent Controller to grant leave to the tenant to
defend and decide the case on merits in accordance with law. Since the matter
is pending for the last four years, we direct the Addl.
Delhi to dispose of the eviction petition as expeditiously as possible and at
any rate within six months from the date of receipt of copy of this Court's
order, without being influenced by any observations made by the High Court
while disposing of R.C.R. No.18 of 2008 dated 29.02.2008.
No order as to costs.
[ H.L. DATTU ]