Badi Panchayat Vaish Bise Aggarwal (Regd) v. Jai Parkash Goyal

$~70 & 71 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ RC.REV. 396/2017 BADI PANCHAYAT VAISH BISE AGGARWAL (REGD) .....Petitioner versus SHRI SUNIL GUPTA .....Respondent + RC.REV. 397/2017 BADI PANCHAYAT VAISH BISE AGGARWAL (REGD) .....Petitioner versus JAI PARKASH GOYAL .....Respondent Appearance:

Mr. Ajay Gupta, Advocate for petitioner in Item Nos. 70 and 71. Mr. Siddharth Aggarwal, Advocate for respondent in Item No. 71. Mr. M. Tarique Siddiqui, Mr. Abhishek K. Tanwar, Mr. Md. Bilal, Mr. Fajallu Rehman and Ms. Lakshi, Advocates for respondent in Item No. 70.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN

O R D E R

% 07.08.2025 1.

These revision petitions have been placed before the Court for adjudication in terms of the Division Bench decision dated 16.05.2025 in Original Reference No. 1/2025 and connected matters. Several questions of law were referred to the Division Bench by an order dated 22.12.2017 in RC.REV. No.18/2016, and similar questions arose in other captioned RC.REV. 396/2017 and connected matter Page 1 of 3 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

petitions also.

2.

These revision petitions are directed against orders dated 19.07.2017, passed by the learned Rent Controller in case No. E319/2017 and E-320/2017. By way of the impugned judgments, the learned Rent Controller held that the eviction petitions filed by the petitioner herein under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 ["DRC Act"], were not maintainable, having been filed by a Registered Society.

3.

The matters were referred to the Division Bench by way of Original Reference No. 8/2025 and 9/2025. The references have been answered by a judgment dated 16.05.2025, alongwith several other questions out of the DRC Act. As far as maintainability of a petition under Section 14(1)(e) of the Act is concerned, the Court has held that a Registered Society is also entitled to maintain such a petition. 4.

The ground upon which the petitions were rejected by the learned Rent Controller no longer sustains. As no other grounds are urged by learned counsel for the parties, the revision petitions are allowed, and the impugned orders dated 19.07.2017 are set aside. 5.

The eviction cases, being case No. E-319/2017 and E-320/2017, are restored to the file of the learned Rent Controller, Central District, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi. The parties will appear before the concerned Court on 22.08.2025.

6.

Mr. Ajay Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner, requests that the eviction petitions be expedited before the Court of the learned Rent Controller. The petitioner may request the learned Rent Controller for such relief, who can take an appropriate decision, depending inter-alia RC.REV. 396/2017 and connected matter Page 2 of 3 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

upon the convenience of the Court, and pendency of older petitions. 7.

The petitions are disposed of in these terms. PRATEEK JALAN, J AUGUST 7, 2025 SS/AD/ RC.REV. 396/2017 and connected matter Page 3 of 3 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.