Facts of the Case

This is RC.REV. 71/2022 before the Delhi High Court, a revision petition filed by tenant Arun Sood against an eviction order dated 23.10.2021 passed by the Additional Rent Controller, Tis Hazari Courts, under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958. This is a rent-control dispute, not a GST matter. The tenanted premises at Nicholson Road, Kashmiri Gate, Delhi, had originally been let to a partnership firm, M/s Scientific Equipments Works, whose partners included the petitioner's late father. After the eviction order, the landlords (respondents 1 and 2) sold the property on 31.03.2022 to third parties (respondents 5 and 6). The petitioner claimed he was still in physical possession and that the sale and an alleged forcible dispossession attempt on 04.04.2022 were improperly concealed from the Trial Court. The respondents countered that the petitioner was never in physical possession — that possession lay with other family members and was later handed to the purchasers — relying on several pieces of evidence, including a letter from the 'GST Division' along with a GST registration certificate and Import/Export Certificate, to establish who was actually occupying the premises.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the tenant-petitioner was ever in actual physical possession of the tenanted premises, a threshold fact for maintaining the revision petition.
  2. Whether the landlords had suppressed material facts (the agreement to sell) from the Trial Court while obtaining the eviction order.
  3. Whether the revision petition was maintainable at all in light of the subsequent sale of the property.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The eviction order was obtained on the ground of bona fide need, but the landlords in fact intended to sell the property, and had already entered into an agreement for sale before the Trial Court's order, a fact withheld from that Court.
  • He remained in physical possession of the premises under his own locks, as asserted throughout the proceedings.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The petitioner was never in physical possession; exclusive possession lay first with the other partners/family members and was later handed to the purchasers (respondents 5 and 6).
  • Multiple official records, including an MCD status report, an architect's survey report, an RTI reply, a police report, and a letter from the GST Division along with the GST registration and Import/Export certificates, established the purchasers' possession and business activity at the premises.
  • The remedy for the petitioner, if any, lay under Section 19 of the DRC Act before the Rent Controller, not by way of this revision.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court held that the petitioner had admittedly never paid rent for or occupied the tenanted premises, which had lain unused and dangerously dilapidated for years.
  • Reliance on the beneficial provisions of the Delhi Rent Control Act by a person never in physical possession was found to be an abuse of process.
  • A revision petition premised only on the subsequent event of sale does not entitle a tenant who was never in physical possession to maintain such a petition; any remedy would lie under Section 19 of the DRC Act, to be examined by the Rent Controller if such a petition is filed.
  • The revision petition was accordingly dismissed as not maintainable, with all interim orders vacated.

Important Clarification

This is a rent-control ruling on possession and maintainability, with no GST holding whatsoever. The GST Division letter and registration certificate appear only as one strand of documentary evidence used to show which party was actually occupying and running a business from the premises — they were not the subject of any tax adjudication.

Sections Involved

  • Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 — Sections 14(1)(e), 14(7) and 19

Decision – In Favour of

In favour of the landlords/purchasers (Respondent Nos. 1, 2, 5 and 6) — the tenant's revision petition was dismissed as not maintainable for want of physical possession, leaving any remedy to be pursued separately under Section 19 of the DRC Act.

Case Details

Court: High Court of Delhi at New Delhi
Case No.: RC.REV. 71/2022 & CM APPL. 21691/2023
Coram: Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora
Date: 10 August 2023 (Reserved 16 May 2023)

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.