Partition of coparcenary property is not a transfer under rent control law, so eviction on bona fide need is not barred.

Partition of Hindu coparcenary property is not an acquisition by transfer for purposes of section 14(6) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958. The provision is aimed at preventing landlords from evading tenant protection by transferring premises to a purchaser who could seek eviction on bona fide requirement. A coparcener already has an antecedent title in the joint property, and partition merely works out that pre-existing interest into separate allotments. Accordingly, property received on partition does not become the coparcener's share by transfer in the statutory sense, and an eviction petition based on bona fide requirement is not barred on that ground.

---

---

Issues: Whether a partition of coparcenary property amounts to an acquisition by transfer within the meaning of section 14(6) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, so as to bar an eviction petition based on bona fide requirement.

Analysis: Section 14(6) was intended to prevent landlords from defeating tenant protection by transferring premises to a purchaser who could then claim eviction under section 14(1)(e). A partition of Hindu coparcenary property is not of the same character as a transfer to a stranger, because each coparcener has an antecedent title to the joint property and partition merely works out that pre-existing title into specific and separate allotments. The property allotted on partition does not become the share of the coparcener by transfer in the sense contemplated by section 14(6).

Conclusion: Partition of coparcenary property is not an acquisition by transfer within section 14(6) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, and the eviction petition was not barred on that ground.

---