Ashwani Bansal And Anr vs Honey Sudhir And Anr

Alka Sarin, J

This is an application for preponing the date of hearing of the main petition from 12.11.2024 to some early date.

Learned counsel for the respondents states that he has no objection if the present application is allowed.

In view of the above, the present application is allowed and the date of hearing of the main petition is preponed from 12.11.2024 and the main case is taken up for hearing today itself with the consent of counsel for the parties.

The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 09.07.2024 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jalandhar whereby the application under Order 14 Rule 5 CPC read with Section 151 CPC for reframing of the issues filed by the tenant-petitioners was dismissed.

Brief facts relevant to the present lis are that the landlord-respondents filed a petition for ejectment of the tenant-petitioners from the suit property. The tenant-petitioners filed a written statement on 08.09.2016 raising therein the plea that there was an agreement to sell dated 03.02.2006 in their favour having been executed by the predecessor-in-interest of the landlord-respondents and possession had been converted as part performance of the said agreement to sell. The Rent Controller framed the issues on 11.09.2017. Provisional rent was also assessed and the same was tendered by the tenant-petitioners on 20.03.2017 without any protest. However, the same was accepted by the landlord-respondents under protest being short and invalid. Both the parties led their evidence and as per the impugned order passed by the Rent Controller the evidence of the tenant-petitioners was closed on 20.10.2023 after granting 18 effective opportunities to lead the evidence. Thereafter, an application was filed by the tenant-petitioners for grant of permission to lead additional evidence on 05.03.2024 when the case was listed for final arguments. The said application was dismissed. Subsequently, the present application was filed by the tenant-petitioners for reframing of the issues to which reply was filed. This application for reframing of the issues was dismissed vide the impugned order dated 09.07.2024. Aggrieved by the same the present revision petition has been filed by the tenant-petitioners.

Learned counsel for the tenant-petitioners would contend that the tenant-petitioners had filed their written statement wherein a plea raised was that an agreement to sell had been executed by the predecessor-in-interest of the landlord-respondents on 03.02.2006 in favour of the tenant-petitioners for a total sale consideration of ₹11,80,000 and possession was converted as part performance of the said agreement. It is further the contention that no issue regarding relationship of landlord-tenant and regarding validity of the agreement to sell dated 03.02.2006 had been framed by the Rent Controller concerned and hence the application for reframing of the issues ought to have been allowed. Learned counsel for the tenant-petitioners would further contend that no further evidence needs to be led as the evidence qua relationship of landlord-tenant has already been led by the parties.

Per contra, learned counsel for the landlord-respondents would contend that the present application was filed only to derail and to delay the proceedings. It is further the contention that as far back as on 08.09.2016 written statement was filed by the tenant-petitioners. Subsequently, a suit for specific performance qua the agreement to sell dated 03.02.2006 was filed by the tenant-petitioners. The tenant-petitioners, thereafter, on 12.11.2018 moved an application for staying the proceedings before the Rent Controller in view of the fact that a suit for specific performance was filed by the tenant-petitioners. The said application for staying the proceedings was dismissed on 15.02.2019 and the said order attained finality as the same was never challenged. Evidence of the tenant-petitioners was closed on 20.10.2023 after granting 18 effective opportunities. On 05.03.2024 an application for additional evidence was filed by the tenant-petitioners which application was dismissed by the Rent Controller. The said order also attained finality inasmuch as the same was never challenged by the petitioners herein. Subsequently the present application has been filed for reframing of the issues only to delay the proceedings.

Heard.

In the present case written statement was filed by the tenant-petitioners on 08.09.2016. After filing of the written statement, a suit for specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 03.02.2006 has admittedly been filed by the tenant-petitioners. The evidence of the tenant-petitioners was closed on 20.10.2023. From the date the issues were framed i.e. 11.09.2017 till 16.04.2024 no steps were taken by the tenant-petitioners to get the issues reframed. Infact, a perusal of the order dated 11.09.2017 clearly reveals that it has been noticed by the Rent Controller that no other issue was pressed or claimed by the parties. Further still, even at the time of tendering of provisional rent, the amount was tendered by the tenant-petitioners without any protest qua there being no relationship of landlord-tenant. Thus, it would appear that from the year 2016 to 2024, the tenant-petitioners have resorted to filing various applications only to derail and delay the proceedings on one pretext or the other. It is trite that the issue of title cannot be gone into by the Rent Controller and the same would be decided in a civil suit which has already been filed by the tenant-petitioners. The argument of the learned counsel for the tenant-petitioners that the issue regarding relationship of landlord-tenant needs to be ascertained in view of the agreement to sell dated 03.02.2006 already stands adequately dealt with by the Rent Controller in the order wherein it has been observed that since the parties have already led their evidence, the same would be covered in the issues No.1 and 2 and there would be no requirement of reframing of issues and the Court is bound to give a finding regarding relationship of landlord-tenant based on the said pleas.

In view of the above, I do not find any merit in the present petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed off.