CONTINUOUS ASSESSMENT TASK-II

MOCK TRIAL IN CIVIL LITIGATION

ASSIGNMENT-II

COURSE CODE: LAW 440

“Reply to the Rent Petition

under Delhi Rent Control Act,
1958”

Submitted To: Submitted By:

Ms. Vanshika Premani Saloni Jain

Assistant Professor of Law BBA LLB. (Hons).

School of Law L1704

Lovely Professional University 11713684

 IN THE COURT OF THE LD. RENT CONTROLLER, TIS HAZARI COURT,

DELHI

WRITTEN STATEMENT NO. 321 OF 2020

MEMO OF PARTIES

Mr. A, aged 46 years, S/o Mr. C, R/o House No. B-11/111, Patel Chowk, Near
Main Post Office, Delhi

… PETITIONER

Versus

Mr. B, aged 42 years, S/o Mr. D, R/o H.No. 168, Adarsh Nagar, Arya Samaj Road,
Saloh Tehsil, SBS Nagar, Nawanshahr, Punjab; presently residing at H.No. B-
11/111, First Floor, Patel Chowk, Near Main Post Office, Delhi.

… RESPONDENT

Written Statement under Order VIII, Rule 1 of the Code of

Civil Procedure, 1908 (as amended up to date) r/w Section
36 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 against the rent
petition no. 321 of 2020 dated 10.07.2020

__________________
 Saloni Jain

Advocate

Counsel for the Respondent

If It May Please Your Worship

Most Respectfully Showeth:

1. That the provisions of paragraph 1 are acknowledged as to the petitioner's

identification. The stated premises, however, do not fall within the
jurisdiction of the Municipal Committee of Delhi, nor does it fall within the
jurisdiction of any other area notified in the First Schedule of the Delhi Rent
Control Act, 1958; thus, the present petition is not maintainable on the basis
of non-applicability.
2. That the terms of paragraph 2 are acknowledged, and that the petitioner is
the owner of the property.
3. The provisions of paragraph 3 are acknowledged in terms of the described
premises' ambient and surrounding dimensions, as well as its location.
4. That the contents mentioned in paragraph 4 are admitted to the extent as to
the residential address of the respondents & tenant induction & purpose of
use of property.
5. That the content of paragraph 5 (as amended by the interlocutory
application) concerning the quantity of rent of Rs. 10,000/- each quarter are
allowed. However, it is important to note that the receipts were provided on
a quarterly basis, i.e. every three months, rather than on a monthly basis by
 the landlord-petitioner. The petition is accompanied with a copy of the
quarterly receipt. (A1 Exhibit)
6. That the provisions of paragraph no. 6 are acknowledged as to the legal
standard rent increase.
7. That the provisions of paragraph no. 7 regarding the practise of issuing
rental receipts/rent notes on payments are accepted. It's worth noting,
though, that these receipts were provided on a "quarterly basis."
8. That the contents of paragraph no. 8 are false, irrelevant, and untrue. Prior
notice was given to the petitioner-landlord regarding the installation of an
oven in connection with the respondent's online bakery lessons, and the
petitioner granted explicit consent for such installation.
9. That the contents of paragraph 9 are a matter of record for the court to
decide.
10. That the contents of paragraph number ten are inaccurate, irrelevant, and
untrue. The respondents were served with a notice based primarily on
"commercial use of property." The respondent's personal usage is being
misrepresented as the petitioner's commercial use, in order to deceive this
Court.
11. That the elements listed in paragraph 11 are false, irrelevant, and untrue.
Respondent No. 2 was doing the baking activity for the aim of self-
education. It's worth noting that Respondent No. 2 was learning to bake
through an online baking course in which she was required to submit
photographs of her cooked cakes. As a result, the photograph of the cake on
the petitioner's website is for the purpose of advertising that online course
website, rather than the respondent no. 2 doing her own company. The
statement includes a copy of the respondent's enrolment certificate in baking
classes. (A2 Exhibit)
12. That the terms of paragraph no. 12 are partially allowed as to the Samsung
Oven's installation in the kitchen since it was a required accessory for
respondent no. 2 to continue her baking sessions for the sole purpose of
learning. The claim that the land was utilised for commercial purposes is
false, irrelevant, and unsubstantiated.
13. That the contents listed in paragraph 13 are false, irrelevant, and untrue.
Respondent No. 1 is a well-known exporter who travels frequently, and
sometimes respondent No. 2 joins him.
14. That the provisions of paragraph 14 (as changed by the interlocutory
application) are false, irrelevant, and unfounded. The petitioner has withheld
from the Hon'ble Court the fact that the rent for the time in question was
paid by check rather than cash. The petitioner indicated that he would issue
the rent receipt the next day, and the respondent took him at his word. This
statement is accompanied by a copy of the respondent's bank statement. 
15. That the contents of paragraph no. 15 are false, irrelevant, and untrue. As
previously stated, respondent no. 1 is an exporter who is frequently
accompanied on business travels by respondent no. 2. The petitioner-opinion
landlord's of the wife's use of business property is solely a result of
premature appraisal and misunderstanding. The petitioner landlord made no
attempt to communicate with the respondents and clarify his issues.
16. That the provisions of paragraph no. 16 are acknowledged. The respondent
responded to the legal notice by disputing all of the charges.
17. That the elements specified in paragraph no. 17 are acknowledged, but that
the petitioner's effort to remove the respondents by force is useless.
18. That the contents of paragraph no. 18 are false, irrelevant, and untrue. The
petitioner landlord owns and operates a paying guesthouse in Karolbagh and
 has access to substitute properties. The petition is accompanied by
photographs of the lodging. (A3 Exhibit)
19. That the contents of paragraph 19 are false, irrelevant, and untrue. The
petitioner's need is not genuine; rather, it is motivated by malice, since he
wishes to rent the premises to the Director General of States, as stated in
paragraph 22 of the petition.
20. Paragraph 20 (as revised in the interlocutory application) is erroneous,
irrelevant, and not admissible. The respondent made no default payment
because the aforementioned rent was paid by check, as indicated previously.
21. The respondents accept that the provisions of paragraph 21 are true to the
point of rejection. The issue of whether or not the exigency was genuine is a
matter of public record.
22. That the contents of paragraph no. 22 are public information. However, it is
important to note that the petitioner's attempt to violently evict the
respondents is a malafide endeavour because the Director General of Estate
offered an enhanced rent to the petitioner.
23.That the contents of paragraph 23 are false, irrelevant, and untrue. The issue
of termination does not arise because all payments were paid systematically
by the respondents.
24. That the contents mentioned in paragraph 24, 25 & 26 are a matter of
record.

___________***____________

PRAYER
 The Counsel for the respondent humbly prays to this Hon’ble Court to kindly
adjudge and pass orders:

1. That the present petition, being non-maintainable, be dismissed.

2. That respondents to remain in possession of the stated premises on rental
basis.
3. Pass any other order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem
appropriate in the facts and circumstances of this present case.

And for this act of kindness, the Respondent as in duty bound, shall forever
pray.

____________________

Mr. B

Mrs. B

RESPONDENT(S)

Through

___________________

Saloni Jain

Advocate for Respondent(s)

JOINT VERIFICATION:

I, Mr. B and Mrs. B, the concerned respondent(s) in this case, do hereby certify
that the contents of the Para 1 to 24 are true and best to my knowledge and as
derived from the records of the case, no part of it is false or malafide and nothing
has been concealed there from.

Verified at Saket Court, Delhi on 10.07.2020.

_______________

Deponent
 IN THE COURT OF THE LD. RENT
CONTROLLER, SAKET COURT,

DELHI

CIVIL RENT PETITION NO. RAJ-00-26 OF 2020

MEMO OF PARTIES

Mr. A, aged 54 years, S/o: Mr. Y, R/o: House No. 26, Patel Chowk, Saket, Delhi

… PETITIONER

Versus

Mr. B, aged 31 years, S/o: Mr. K, R/o: House No.1125, Barkat Nagar, Kisan
Marg, Tonk Road, Tonk Fatak, Jaipur.

… RESPONDENT

AFFIDAVIT

Mr. B, aged 31 years, S/o: Mr. K, R/o: House No.1125, Barkat Nagar, Kisan
Marg, Tonk Road, Tonk Fatak, Jaipur, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as
under:

1. That I am the respondent in the accompanying suit and I am well conversant

with the facts and circumstances of the case & application to depose the
present affidavit.
2. That I have read & understood the contents of the accompanying petition &
state that the same are true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
 3. That no part of the written statement is false and nothing has been concealed
there from.
4. That no other written statement concerning the same issue has been filed in
any other coordinate court, superior court or any foreign court.
5. That the court fee has been duly paid by me in respect of the accompanying
petition.

____________

Deponent

VERIFICATION:
Verified at Saket Court, Delhi on 21.07.2020 that the contents of the above
affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge and as derived from the records of
the case, no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed there from.

_____________

Deponent