A Delhi court has dismissed an appeal filed by a man claiming to be the landlord of a rented property while stating that the appellant cannot claim himself to be the owner/landlord for the simple reason the surviving member certificate does not confer any right, title or interest.
Principal District and Sessions Judge Dinesh Kumar Sharma, Rent Control Tribunal, New Delhi has said the petitioner has not filed any document which could show him as the landlord. There is no written agreement. There is no rent receipt or any other document to show that the respondents were inducted as a tenant by the petitioner or the petitioner has ever received a rent from the respondents.
Further the Court has held, that the respondents have placed on record certain documents to show that they were residing in the premises in question much before 2012 when the petitioner alleged to have induced them as tenant. The documents filed by the respondents are the documents issued by the authorities and there is a presumption of genuineness for such documents. Therefore, the appeal against the Ld. Trial Court is dismissed.
The court passed its decision on an appeal filed against the order of the Ld. Additional Rent Controller which had dismissed the eviction petition u/S 14(1)(a) DRC Act filed by one Kehar Singh.
Kehar Singh claimed to be the owner of rented property situated in JJ Colony Delhi, after the death of his younger son Manjeet Singh who was the actual owner of the property. Kehar Singh further claimed that his wife Late. Surjeet Kaur also executed a will bequeathing the property (movable/immovable) in favour of him. He further stated before the Court that tenants does not have any documents regarding the ownership pertaining to the property in dispute. He also averred that the trial court ignored the material on Record that the respondents were not able to show anything about their status as to the property in dispute.
The court said, there was no landlord and tenant relationship between the parties and the respondent denied the same. There was nothing on Record to show that the appellant receiving any rent from the disputed property.
The court also finds that the general power of attorney and agreement to sell have been executed in favour of Manjeet Singh by Sh. Surender Kumar in regard to the property in dispute were not executed on any stamp paper.
The court said, it is a settled proposition that in order to succeed u/S 14(1)(a) DRC Act, it is not necessary for the petitioner to prove the ownership in the strict sense. The petitioner can succeed if he has been able to prove that he has better title or he is landlord of the premises in dispute.
“The case of the appellant is that by virtue of this surviving member certificate the ownership vested in him and Ms Surjeet Kaur who died on 19/07/2013 and she executed a will before her death whereby all the movable and immovable properties were bequeathed to him,” noted the Court in its order.
It held, “this Court considers that on the basis of these documents, the appellant cannot claim himself to be the owner/landlord for the simple reason the surviving member certificate does not confer any right, title or interest…
….this Will does not contain the details of the property nor does it contain the name, parentage and address of the witnesses. The tone, tenure and appearance of the Will leaves much to be desired.”
Rent-Control-Judgment-1