Rajinder Kumar Gupta v. Sushila Devi

Delhi High Court · 31 Jul 2025 · 2025:DHC:6372
Manoj Jain
CM(M) 4116/2024
2025:DHC:6372
civil petition_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court refused interim interference against dismissal of a Section 151 CPC application pending review before the Rent Controller in an eviction matter under the Delhi Rent Control Act.

Full Text
Translation output
CM(M) 4116/2024 1
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 31st July, 2025
CM(M) 4116/2024
RAJINDER KUMAR GUPTA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Sr.Advocate
WITH
Mr. Jaideep Singh, Mr. Aman Dhyani, Ms. Kanchan Samwal, Mr. Rakshit Anand, Mr. Rudhraksh Gautam, Mr. Lalit Jhangra, advocates
WITH
petitioner in person.
VERSUS
SUSHILA DEVI (DECEASED) THROUGH LR .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Arvind K Gupta
WITH
Mr. Abhiesumat Gupta and Mr. Arun Bhattacharya and Mr. Ishan parashar, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
JUDGMENT
(oral)

1. There is already an eviction order against the petitioner herein on the ground of bonafide requirement under Section 14(1)(e) of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958.

2. However, instead of challenging the abovesaid order by filing any revision petition, petitioner filed a review application before the learned Controller and while the abovesaid review application was pending, he moved an application under Section 151 CPC to highlight certain subsequent events. CM(M) 4116/2024 2

3. Dismissal of such application is under challenge.

4. Fact, however, remains that the review application is still pending adjudication and, therefore, this Court does not deem it appropriate to interfere with the matter at such intermediate stage of the case.

5. Petition is, accordingly, disposed of with the direction that after the disposal of review petition by the learned Controller, if revision is, eventually filed, it would be permissible for the petitioner herein to raise all the contentions which are being raised before this Court while impugning order dated 27.07.2024 and 16.10.2024.

6. Petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.

7. All rights and contentions of the parties are left open.

8. Learned Rent Controller is, reportedly, awaiting for the outcome of the present petition and the matter is fixed before the learned Controller on 21.08.2025.

9. The liberty is, however, granted to the parties to raise fresh oral arguments before the learned Controller with respect to the abovesaid review application only. Since the eviction is sought on the ground of the bonafide requirement, this Court expects that the learned Controller would dispose of the abovesaid review application, as expeditiously as possible.

JUDGE JULY 31, 2025/sw/JS