Sr. No. l' tL Orders IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of hearing : October 30, 2OO3 Date of Decision : October 30, 2003 CM (M) No.76912003 M/S PARNASSUS PUBLISHBRS & PRINTBRS PVT. LIMITED rhrough' M,. d;i;"X"1;liJ,i,u, Sr. Adv. q/ith Mr. Sameer Nandwani, Mr. hntiaz Ahrned Ms.Nagma lmtiaz and Mr. Kamrau Malik Advocates, fot the Petitioner versus LEGAL HEIRS OF SH. K C. BABBAR KUMARI SAROJ Irrrough, N"n,o"".ReqPondettt CORAM;- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.C. JAIN 1. Whether the Re,porters of local papers may be allowed lo see rhe judgment? 2.Tobe referred to the Reporter or not'? 3- Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? R. C. JAIN" .T. (ORAL) CM No. 1621/2003 (Exemprion) Allowed subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of accordingly. CM (M) No. 769/2003 This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of lndia is direcred against the order of the Aclditional Rent Conuol Tribunal, Dellri, > SHRI SHYAM SALES 02.03 Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Signature Not Verified Sr. No. Orders dated 13.10.2003, thereby dismissing an appeal filed by tlre petitioner against the order of the Rent Controller Dated 5.5.2000. Both the courts below have returned a categorical finding that the tender of rent purcuant to a demand nolice was nol a valid tender inasnuch as the rent was sought to be deposited for and on behalf of M/s Mastana Jogi International Pvt. Ltd. who was not the tenant. and M/s Parnassus Putrlishers & Printers Pvt. Limited was the tenant. This being a case of second" default, the learned Controller passed eviciion order under the provisions of Section 14 (1) (a) of the Act. Leamed counsel for the petitioner see*s lo assail the irnpugned order primarily on the.ground that though the pay order was on account of M/s Mastana Jogi International Pvt. Ltd. yet by means of. forwarding letter the petitioner trad clarified the position thal there was llot intention on the part of the petitioner to acquire the tenancy rigtrts in favour'of M/s Mastana Jogi International Pvt. Ltd.. According to him, the tender of rent. was legal and valid- Itt support of his contention, he tras heavily relied upoll a Supreme Courl decision in the case of Rama Kant & Ors. Vs. S Q2O2) 3 SCC 161-wlrere on the facts zurd circumstances of that case that the son of the tenan[ in the capacity of a farnily mernber hacl tendered the rent, the coufi. took tlre view that it was a valid tender of rent on batralf of the tenant. In the opinion of this Court ttre petitioner cannot seek any support from this authority trecause not only that. the facts are entirely different in the present case but both the courts have returned a positive finding about a mischievious design and conduct on the part of the tenant. in resorting to such an action by SHRI SHYAM SALES 02-03 LJ Sr. No. , r,r Orders tendering the rent. from the account. of M/s Mastana Jogi International Pvt. Ltd. \phich cannot. be for any other purpose exc€pt to see rhat sornehow M/s Mastana Jogi International Pvt. Ltd. is recognized. as a tenanl in the long run. Such au attempt cannot. be allowed to succeed and the courts below were fully justified in recording tlre said finding. No jurisdictional error, illegality or rnaterial inegulariry exits in the impugned order which calls for any interference by this Court in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Dsmissed. ocToBER 30. 2003 satt SHzu SHYAM SALES 02-03