Chain Sukh Pal v. Shiv Charan Goel

Delhi HC20 May 2025CM(M)/944/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: bonafide requirement; eviction petition; leave to defend application; Rent Controller; cost of Rs. 10,000/- imposed on tenant; waiver of cost; advance copies not supplied to counsel; Section 151 CPC; Section 10 CPC; applications conditional on payment of cost; subsequent event / stay argument; rider dated 28.05.2025; CM(M) 944/2025; Chain Sukh Pal v. Shiv Charan Goel; Justice Manoj Jain; petition disposed of; pending applications disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Waiver of the Rs. 10,000/- cost imposed on the tenant by the learned Rent Controller on 19.03.2025, subject to the rider that on 28.05.2025 the tenant assists the Rent Controller and advances arguments on his two applications, with liberty to the landlord to file reply. ¶¶26

Chain Sukh Pal Vs Shiv Charan Goel — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the learned Rent Controller was justified in burdening the tenant with a cost of Rs. 10,000/-, with a further condition that the tenant's two applications would not be considered unless the cost was paid, merely because advance copies of the applications were not supplied to the landlord's counsel. +1 more

¶¶21

Court's answer

Merely because advance copies of the tenant's two applications were not supplied to the opposite counsel, the learned Rent Controller ought not to have burdened the tenant with the cost of Rs. 10,000/-, nor made consideration of those applications conditional upon payment of the cost.

¶¶21

Ratio / Principle

The petition is disposed of with the direction that the cost of Rs. 10,000/- imposed by the learned Rent Controller on 19.03.2025 is waived.

¶¶22

Key takeaways

The waiver carries a rider: on the next date, i.e. 28.05.2025, the tenant (petitioner herein) must render due assistance and cooperation to the learned Rent Controller and advance arguments on the two applications; the landlord is at liberty to file reply, if any, to those applications.ratio¶¶24
Whether arguments on the application seeking leave to defend are heard the same day rests entirely with the learned Rent Controller; nevertheless, the counsel for the tenant must come prepared to advance arguments on the leave to defend application as well.ratio¶¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Jain), oral judgment dated 20.05.2025, CM(M) 944/2025 - Chain Sukh Pal (tenant/petitioner) v. Shiv Charan Goel (landlord/respondent). The tenant is defending an eviction petition founded on bonafide requirement; arguments on his leave to defend application remained unheard. On 19.03.2025 the learned Rent Controller had imposed a cost of Rs. 10,000/- on the tenant for moving two applications (one under Section 151 CPC, the other under Section 10 CPC) without supplying advance copies to the landlord's counsel, and had further directed that arguments on those applications would not be heard unless the cost was paid. Holding: the Controller ought not to have burdened the tenant with such cost and condition merely because of the absence of advance copies. Disposition: petition disposed of; the Rs. 10,000/- cost waived; rider - on 28.05.2025 the tenant to render due assistance and cooperation and advance arguments on the two applications, the landlord free to file reply; whether arguments on the leave to defend application are also taken up that day rests entirely with the Rent Controller, with the tenant's counsel to come prepared accordingly.

¶1

$~68

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 20^th May, 2025

¶4

- CM(M) 944/2025& CM APPL. 30955-30956/2025

¶5

CHAIN SUKH PAL .....Petitioner

¶6

Through: Mr. Pradeep Kumar, Advocate with petitioner in person (through V.C.)

¶7

versus

¶8

SHIV CHARAN GOEL .....Respondent Through: Mr. J.K. Gupta, Advocate (through V.C.)

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral)

¶10

Petitioner is defending a petition which seeks eviction on the ground of bonafide requirement.

¶11

The arguments on leave to defend application are yet to be heard.

¶12

It seems that the petitioner/tenant had moved two applications before the learned Rent Controller on 19.03.2025. Since copies of these applications were not supplied in advance to learned counsel for the landlord, the learned Rent Controller has burdened the tenant with cost of Rs.10,000/-.

¶13

It is also directed in the impugned order that if the cost of Rs.10,000/- is not paid, the Court would not hear arguments on those two applications moved by the tenant. One such application is under Section 151 CPC and the other has been filed under Section 10 CPC.

¶14

Sh. S.K. Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent/landlord has joined the proceedings through video conferencing on advance notice.

¶15

Undoubtedly, if the tenant was of the view that there is some

¶16

Signature Not Verified

¶17

CM(M) 944/2025

¶18

¶19

Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:2 1.05.2025 16:49:49

¶20

subsequent event or that he has a case whereby eviction proceedings are liable to be stayed, he should have moved the applications well in advance and should have also ensured that advance copies thereof are supplied to the opposite counsel.

¶21

However, merely because of the aforesaid, the learned Controller should not have burdened the tenant with the cost of Rs.10,000/- with further condition that the applications would not be considered, unless and until the cost was paid.

¶22

After hearing arguments from both the sides, the present petition is disposed of with direction that the cost of Rs.10,000/-, as imposed by the learned Rent Controller on 19.03.2025, is waived.

¶23

However, it comes with a rider.

¶24

On the next date i.e. 28.05.2025, the petitioner herein i.e. tenant, would render due assistance and cooperation to the learned Rent Controller and would advance arguments with respect to the abovesaid two applications. The Landlord would also be at liberty to file reply, if any, to the abovesaid applications.

¶25

It is entirely upto the learned Rent Controller, if it chooses to hear arguments on application seeking leave to defend same day. Needless to say, the learned counsel for the tenant would come prepared for advancing arguments on application seeking leave to defend, as well.

¶26