RASHIDA BEGUM versus GENERAL SALES LTD.

Citation: [2002] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 59 · Decided: 09-07-2002 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.P. MOHAPATRA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

RASHIDA BEGUM 
A 
v. 
GENERAL SALES LTD. 
JULY 9, 2002 
[D.P. MOHAPATRA AND SHIVARAJ V. PATIL, JJ.] 
B 
Rent Control and Eviction: 
Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958--Section 14(1) proviso (k) and 14(11)-
Eviction-On ground of misuser of the premises and breach of conditions of C 
lease-On facts, agreement of lease of land executed between parties-
Agreement specifying that till formal lease deed was executed lessee would be 
bound by the covenants and conditions and also in case ofbreach•of agreement 
lessor could retain possession of property-Lessee constructing building and 
renting portion of it-Lessor ,issuing notice to lessee terminating lease on D 
ground of misuser and directing lessee to hand over possession-Lessee filing 
eviction petition against tenant on ground of misuser-Petition dismirled by 
Rent Controller-Tribunal directing Rent Controller to determine 
compensation-tenant then seeking dismissal of eviction petition as no formal 
lease deed executed between parties-Rent Controller allowing application--
However, tribunal setting aside the order of Rent Controller and directing him E 
to determine compensation-Order challenged-High Court allowing 
application of tenant-Justification of-On appeal, held, when lessor had 
issued notice to lessee terminating lease on ground of misuser, lessee was 
entitled to file application for eviction of tenant-Technical plea that absence 
of formal lease deed cannot be taken as a ground by tenant in eviction petition- F 
Thus High Court not justified in dismissing the eviction petition. 
Appellant-lessee was granted lease of a plot of land by the officer 
acting on behalf of the President of India. A registered·agreement for lease 
was executed between the parties. In the agreement it was provided that 
till the formal lease deed was executed the lessee would be bound by all G 
the covenants and conditions as if the lease had actually been executed 
and also that in case of breach of agreement, lessor could take the 
possession of the land. Appellant-lessee was delivered the possession of the 
land and permission was granted for construction of a building. Appellant-
lessee constructed the building and rented out portion of it to respondent. 
59 
H 
60 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2002] SUPP. I S.C.R. 
A Then lessor issued notice to appellant-lessee terminating the lease on the 
ground of misuser of premises. Appellant-lessee terminated the agreement 
in favour of respondent-tenant and directed him to handover vacant 
possession. Respondent-tenant failed to vacate premises. Appellant-lessee 
then filed eviction petition under Section 14(l}(k} of the Delhi Rent Control 
Act, 1958 on the ground of misuser of the premises. Additional Rent 
B · Controller (ARC) dismissed the eviction petition. However, tribunal set 
aside the order of the ARC and directed him to proceed to determine the 
damages under section 14(11) of the Act. Respondent then filed an 
application for dismissal of the petition as no formal lease deed had been 
executed between the lessor and appellant-lessee. ARC allowed the 
C application. Aggrieved, appellant-lessee filed an appeal challenging the 
order of ARC. Tribunal allowed the appeal and .directed ARC to fix the 
compensation. Respondent~tenant then filed an appeal before the High 
Court challenging the order of the tribunal, which was allowed. Hence the 
present appeal. 
D 
The question that arose for consideration in these appeal.s was 
whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the High Court was 
right in dismissing the eviction petition filed by appellant-lessee under 
clause (k) of the proviso to section 14 (1) of the Act on the ground that no 
formal lease deed had been executed between the appellant-lessee and the 
E superior lessor. 
F 
Allowing the appeals, the Court 
HELD: 1. Under Section 14(1) proviso clause (k) of the Delhi Rent 
Control Act 1958, stress is laid on the conduct of the tenant, who has 
misused or dealt with the premises in a manner contrary to any condition 
imposed on the landlord by the Government while giving him the lease of 
the land on which the premises are situate. In the proviso to Section 14(1) 
grounds are enumerated on which a· landlord can seek recovery of 
possession of the premises from a tenant. Clause (k) of the Act is intended 
to protect the interest of the landlord who may face termination of the 
G lease and lose the property for breach of conditions· imposed by the 
superior lessor on him while 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.