In Re: Stay Vacation Application No.254709 of 2009.
Heard Smt. Rama Goel, "Bansal", counsel for the applicant respondent and Sri A.N.Bhargava, counsel for the appellant.
Pleadings have been exchanged. It emerges from the record that the landlord had sought release of the rented property and an order was passed by the Prescribed Authority on 28.8.98. This order was challenged by filing a writ petition which was dismissed and Special Leave Petition was preferred against the said judgment which was also dismissed on 1.5.2009. According to this chronology of events and the judgments rendered by this Court and the Hon'ble Apex Court , the release order in respect of the property in dispute have become final and binding on landlord and tenant. In the meantime one Kamlesh Kumar Gupta has entered into the dispute. He filed a suit in the trial court seeking injunction against the landlord on the ground that he is a tenant in whose favour was a rent deed executed on 8.5.1992. Smt. Rama Goel has denied the execution of this rent deed. According to Smt. Rama Goel, Kamlesh Kumar Gupta is a stranger to the property. He did not put in appearance before the appropriate rent control authority while the release was being sought and did not get himself impleaded when the litigation was going on in this Court and thereafter in the Hon'ble Apex Court . The release order has become final and binding on the parties. Sri Bhargava has tried to persuade the Court that he was inducted in the property as tenant by the rent deed on 8.5.92.
The Court has asked a specific question to Sri Bhargava whether an approval of the Rent Control Authority while being inducted as tenant in the disputed property was obtained. Here is a case where the release was sought against Sri K.K.Agrawal by the landlord. It appears from the pleading that Sri K.K.Agrawal was a tenant against whom a release was sought by the landlord. The appellant has not appeared before the Rent Control Authority by filing objections as to when in fact he became tenant for the first time. It appears that he entered in arena of the litigation only after dismissal of the case by the Apex Court and the landlord has tried to take possession of the property. There is substance in the submission of Smt. Rama Goel . In view of the above, the interim order dated 27.8.2009 is not extended further. It is vacated.
The concerned authority under the Rent Control laws/ District Magistrate, Mathura is directed to ensure compliance of the release order dated 28.8.98 . If police assistance is required, necessary adequate force may be provided to the concerned authority to implement the release order. List this case for hearing in the week commencing 22nd February, 2010.
Order Date :- 28.1.2010 VPC