2 days ago
Delhi Rent Control Act an anachronistic legislation: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court has called the Delhi Rent Control Act an 'anachronistic piece of legislation', the 'egregious' misuse of which has forced property owners into desperate circumstances as well-off tenants 'unjustly occupy premises for decades on-end'.
Justice Anup Jairam Bhambani made the observation while hearing petitions against a 2013 order of the Additional Rent Controller (ARC) that dismissed eviction petitions of the owners of a property in Sadar Bazar and ruled in favour of the tenants.
'This court is compelled to record that while manning the Rent Control Roster, it has found that cases abound where very well-off tenants enjoying financial prosperity persist in unjustly occupying premises for decades on-end, paying pittance for rent, while in the process their landlords are forced into impecunious and desperate circumstances, resulting from egregious misuse of an anachronistic piece of legislation, namely the Delhi Rent Control Act,' the court said in the July 2 judgment.
The owners sought the eviction of the tenants on the ground that they run two restaurants in London and require the space for expanding the business in India. As per the owners, the premises are presently fetching paltry rents of ₹40 per month each. The premises have been in the occupation of the tenants for more than 50 years.
The ARC had denied the eviction, noting that the petitioners were settled-in and were running their businesses in London and Dubai, and did not require the premises for their 'subsistence or survival'.
The ARC had also concluded that given the measurements of the subject premises, a restaurant cannot be run from those premises alone.
The court, however, said whether the owners are 'able to run a full-fledged, sit-down restaurant or a smaller food take-away vend is entirely the petitioners' prerogative; and the bona-fidés of their requirement cannot be discounted based merely on the learned ARC's assessment of whether a food business can be run from the subject premises'.
The court set aside the ARC's decision. 'Consequently, the eviction petitions are allowed and the petitioners are entitled to evict the respondents from the subject premises and obtain vacant, physical possession thereof, in accordance with law,' the court said.
