The Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 amended in 1988 provides the landlord a statutory tool for eviction of a landlord under the Act, if the landlord is in genuine and bonafide need of the rented premises.
This is to say that if the landlord requires the tenated premises for his own use- whether to conduct a business or to reside in the property and the landlord has no other alternative property which he can use for the said purpose then he can seek the eviction of the tenant.
The Supreme Court has held in Smt. Gian Devi Anand vs Jeeevan Kumar And Others 1985 AIR 796, that bona fide need of the landlord will stand very much on the same footing in regard to either class of premises, residential or commercial. [1]
Section 14 (1) (e)
That the premises let for residential purposes 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 that the landlord or such person has no other reasonably suitable residential accommodation.
In order to succeed in the petition under Section 14 (1)(e), the landlord has to establish the below circumstances :-
- Petitioner is owner and landlord in respect of the tenanted premises.
- The petitioner requires the premises bonafide for herself or for any member of her family dependent upon her.
- The petitioner has no other reasonably suitable accommodation.
Special procedure for the disposal of applications seeking eviction on the ground of bona fide requirement
Section 25 B of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 provides for the
- Every application by a landlord for the recovery of possession of any premises on the ground specified in clause (e) shall be dealt with in accordance with the procedure specified in this section.
- The Controller shall issue summons, in relation to every application referred to him.
- Way by which summons are to be issued:-
- The Controller shall, in addition to, and simultaneously with, the issue of summons for service on the tenant, also direct the summons to be served by registered post, acknowledgement due, addressed to the tenant or his agent empowered to accept the service at the place where the tenant or his agent actually and voluntarily resides or carries on business or personally works for gain and may ,if the circumstances of the case so require, also direct the publication of the summons in a newspaper circulating in the locality.
- When an acknowledgement purporting to be signed by the tenant or his agent is received by the Controller or the registered article containing the summons is received back the Controller may declare that there has been a valid service of summons.
- The tenant on whom the summons is duly served (whether in the ordinary way or by registered post) in the form specified in the Third Schedule shall not contest the prayer for eviction from the premises unless he files and affidavit stating the grounds on which he seeks to contest the application for eviction and obtains leave from the Controller
- The Controller shall give to the tenant leave to contest the application if the affidavit filed by the tenant discloses such facts as would disentitle the landlord from obtaining an order for the recovery of possession of the premises on the ground of bonafide requirement.
- Where leave is granted to the tenant to contest the application, the Controller shall commence the hearing of the application as early as practicable.
Judicial Decision in respect of Bonafide need of landlord
The Supreme Court in Baldev Singh Bajwa v. Monish Saini, [2]. held that whenever a landlord seeks ejectment of a tenant for bona fide requirement, it shall be presumed to be genuine and bona fide. Furthermore, the burden to rebut the said presumption lies on the tenant; however, the mere assertion on part of the tenant does not suffice.
In Satyawati Sharma vs. Union of India & Anr.[3], it was held that “Section 14(1)(e) of the 1958 Act is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India because it discriminates between the premises rented out for residential and non-residential purposes.
But when the same are required bona fide by the landlord for occupation for himself or for any member of his family dependent on him then it restricts the right of landlord and protects tenant in respect of residential premises.
This means that if the landlord has let out the property for commercial purpose then he can not seek the eviction of the tenant on the ground of bonafide requirement for his residential use because he himself gave the property for commercial use and now the premises are not of residential purpose alone.
In the case of Atyam Veerraju v. Pechetti Venkanna [4] the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that a tenant who has been let into possession cannot deny his landlords title, however defective it may be, so long as he has not openly restored possession by surrender to his landlord.”
Conclusion
In order to summarize the following key points are to be kept in mind:
- The landlord can seek eviction of tenant from tenated premises in case of his bonafide need of the tenated premises under Section 14 (1) (e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958.
- For proving bonafide the petitioner must prove the following:-
- Petitioner is owner and landlord in respect of the tenanted premises.
- The petitioner requires the premises bonafide for herself or for any member of her family dependent upon her.
- The petitioner has no other reasonably suitable accommodation.
- The petition is to be filed before the rent controller who will issue summons to the tenant,
- The controller has to satisfied by the tenant on the front that he has genuine grounds with him which would stop the landlord from succeeding in his case.
- After being satisfied, the controller will give the tenant a leave to defend.
- When a petition is filed for eviction on the ground of bonafide requirement, the Controller shall presume the requirement to be genuine and it is upon the tenant to rebut the presumption.
- A petition for eviction will lie before the Rent Controoler under Dection 14 (1)(e) of the Act.
- An appeal against the decision of rent controller will lie before the Rent control tribunal within 30 days from the date of passing of order by the controller under Section 38 of the Act.
- An appeal against the decision of the tribunal shall lie with the High Court within 60 days from the date of order.
- The tenant can not challenge the title of the landlord, irrespective of the defects in it.
[1] Decided by the Supreme Court of India on 1 May, 1985 through bench comprising of Bench: Justice Chandrachud, Y.V. (CJI), Bhagwati, P.N., Fazalali, Syed Murtaza, Sen, Amarendra Nath (J), Eradi, V. Balakrishna (J).
[3] 2008 (5) SCC 287
[4] 1996) 1 SCR 831,
You may contact me for consultation or advice by visiting Contact Us
