The Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958
14. Protection of tenant against eviction. –
(1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other law or contract, no order or decree for the recovery of possession of any premises shall be made by and court or Controller in favour of the landlord against a tenet:
Provided that the Controller may, on an application made to him in the prescribed manner, make an order for the recovery of possession of the premises on one or more of the following grounds only, namely:-
(a) That the tenant has neither paid nor tendered the whole of the arrears of the rent legally recoverable from him within two months of the date on which a landlord in the manner provided in section 106 of the Transfers of
Property Act, 1882 (4 of 1882);
(b) That the tenant has, on or after the 9th day of June, 1952, sublet, assigned or otherwise without obtaining the consent in writing of the landlord;
(c) That the tenant has used the premises for purpose other than that for which they were let-
(i) If the premises have been let on or after the 9th day of June, 1952, without obtaining the consent in writing of the landlord; or
(ii) If the premises have been let before the said date without obtaining his corisent;
(d) That the premises were let for use as a residence and neither the tenant nor any member of his family has been residing therein for a period of six months immediately before the date of the filing of the application for the recovery of possession thereof;
(e) That the premises let for residential purpose are required bona fide by the landlord for occupation as a residence for himself or for any member of his family dependent on him, if he is the owner thereof , or for any person for whose benefit the premises are held and the landlord or such person has no other reasonably suitable residential accommodation;
Explanation.- For the purpose of this clause, “premises let for residential purpose” include any premises which having been let for use as a residence are, without the consent of the landlord, used incidentally for commercial or other purposes;
(f) That the premises have become unsafe or unfit for human habitation and are required bona fide by the landlord for carrying out repairs which cannot be carried out without the premises being vacated;
(g) That the premises are required bona fide by the landlord for the purpose building or re-building or making thereto any substantial additions or alterations and that such building or re-building or addition or alteration cannot be carried out without the premises being vacated;
(h) That the tenant has, whether before or after the commencement of this Act, (Note: The word “built” omitted by Act 57 of 1988, sec.8 (w.e.f. 1-12-1988)) acquired vacant possession of, or been allotted, a residence;
[(hh) (Note: Ins. by Act 57 of 1988, sec.8 (w.e.f. 1-12-1988)) That the tenant has, after the commencement of the Delhi Rent Control (Amendment) Act, 1988, built a residence and ten years have elapsed there-after;]
(i) That the premises were let to the tenant for use as a residence by reason of his being in the service or employment of the landlord, and that the tenant has ceased, whether before or after the commencement of this Act, to be in such service or employment;
(j) That the tenant has, whether before or after the commencement of this Act, caused or permitted to be caused substantial damage to the premises;
(k) That the tenant has, notwithstanding previous notice, used or dealt with the premises in a manner contrary to any condition imposed on the landlord by the Government or the Delhi Development Authority or the Municipal Corporation of Delhi while giving him a lease of the land on which the premises are situate;
(i) That the landlord requires the premises in order to carry out any building work at the instance of the Government or the Delhi Development Authority or the Municipal Corporation of Delhi in pursuance of any improvement scheme or development scheme and that such building work cannot be carried out without the premises being vacated.
(2) No order for the recovery of possession of any premises shall be made on the ground specified in clause (a) of the proviso to sub-section (1) if the tenant makes payment or deposit as required by section 15:
Provided that no tenant shall be entitled to the benefit under this sub-section, if, having obtained such benefit once in respect of any premises, he again makes a default in the payment of rent of those premises for three consecutive months.
(3) No order for the recovery of possession in any proceeding under sub-section (1) shall be binding on any sub-tenant referred to in section 17 who has given notice of his sub-tenancy to the landlord under the provisions of that section, unless the sub-tenant is made a party to the proceeding and the order for eviction is made binding on him.
(4) For the purpose of clause (b) of the proviso to sub-section (1), any premises which have been let for being used for the purpose of business or profession shall be deemed to have been sub-let by the tenant, if the Controller is satisfied that the tenant without obtaining the consent in writing of the landlord has, after the 16th day of August, 1958, allowed any person is a partner of the tenant in the business or profession but really for the purpose of sub-letting such premises to the person.
(5) No application for the recovery of possession of any premises shall lie under sub-section (1) on the ground specified in clause (c ) of the proviso thereto, unless the landlord has given to the tenant a notice in the prescribed manner requiring him to stop the misuse of the premises and the tenant has refused or failed to comply with such requirement within one month of the date of service of the notice; and no order for eviction against the tenant shall be made in such a case, unless the Controller is satisfied that the misuse of the premises is of such a nature that it is a public nuisance or that it causes damage to the premises or is otherwise detrimental to the interest of the landlord.
(6) Where a landlord has acquired any premises by transfer, no application for the recovery of possession of such premises shall lie under sub-section (1), on the ground specified in clause (e ) of the proviso thereto, unless a period of five years have elapsed from the date of the acquisition.
(7) Where an order for the recovery of possession of any premises is made on the ground specified in clause(c ) of the proviso to sub-section (1), the landlord shall not be entitled to obtain possession thereof before the expiration of a period of six months from the date of the order.
(8) No order for the recovery or possession of any premises shall be made on the ground specified in clause (g) of the proviso to sub-section (1), unless the Controller is satisfied that the proposed reconstruction will not radically after the purpose for which the premises were let or such ramidically alteration is in the public interest, and that the plans and estimates of such reconstruction have been properly prepared and that necessary fund for the purpose are available with the landlord.
(9) No order for the recovery of possession of any premises shall be made on the ground specified in clause (I) of the proviso to sub-section (1), if the Controller is of opinion that there is any bona fide dispute as to whether the tenant has ceased to be in the service or employment of the landlord.
(10) No order for the recovery of possession of any premises shall be made on the ground specified in clause ,(i) of the proviso to sub-second (1) if the tenant, within such time as may be specified in this behalf by the Controller, carries out repairs to the damage caused to the satisfaction of the Controller or pays to the landlord such amount by way of compensation as the Controller may direct .
(11) No order for the recovery of possession of any premises shall be made on the ground specified in clause(k) of the proviso of sub-section (1), if the tenant, within such time as may be specified in this behalf by the Controller, complies with the condition imposed on the landlord by any of the authorities referred to in that clause or pays to that authority such amount by way of compensation as the Controller may direct.
COMMENTS
(i) Payment of rent or monetary consideration by sub-tenant to tenant may have been made secretly, the law does not require such payment to be proved by affirmative evidence and the court is permitted to draw its own inference upon the facts of the case proved at the trial, including the delivery of exclusive possession to infer that the premises were sub-let; M/s Bharat Sales Ltd. v. Life Insurance Corporation of India, AIR 1998 SC 1240.
(ii) It is settled principle of law that if a tenanted premises is a house then it means that letting was for residing and house means a dwelling place. If tenant gives address of his house for commercial communication or correspondence, then it would not mean commercial user; Shri Kishan Lal v. Shri Rajan Chand Khanna, AIR 1993 Del 1.
(iii) The law is well settled that the landlord is entitled to assess the need and requirement for himself and hisother family members. Neither the court nor the tenant can dictate to him the mode and manner in which he should live or to prescribe for him a residential standard of their own; Devi Ram v. Ram Kapoor, 76 (1998) DLT 637.
(iv) Sub-section (11) of section 14 enables the Controller to give an another opportunity to the tenant to avoid an order of eviction. Where the authority concerned requires stoppage of misuser then an order to that effect has to be passed, but where the authority merely demands compensation for misuser then only in such a case would the Controller be justified in passing an order for payment of compensation alone; Dr. K. Madan v. Smt. Krishnawati, AIR 1997 SC 579.
The Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958
