Compromise eviction decree under rent control law is void if no statutory ground is judicially satisfied

In rent control proceedings, an eviction decree cannot be validly passed on compromise unless the court is satisfied that a statutory ground for eviction is proved. A compromise cannot confer jurisdiction where the statute bars recovery of possession without such satisfaction. Because the court did not apply its mind to the alleged subletting and acted only on the compromise, the decree was without jurisdiction, a nullity, and incapable of execution.

---

---

Issues: Whether an eviction decree passed on compromise, without the Court's satisfaction that a statutory ground for eviction existed under the rent control law, was a nullity and incapable of execution.

Analysis: Section 13 of the Delhi and Ajmer Rent Control Act, 1952 barred a decree for recovery of possession against a tenant unless the Court was satisfied that one of the specified grounds for eviction had been proved. A compromise between the parties could not confer jurisdiction on the Court to pass an eviction decree in the absence of such satisfaction. The record showed that the Court had not applied its mind to the alleged subletting and had acted only on the compromise.

Conclusion: The decree was without jurisdiction and therefore a nullity. It could not be executed, and the contention of the respondent succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: In proceedings governed by a rent control statute that conditions eviction on the Court's satisfaction of a statutory ground, a decree for possession passed merely on compromise without such satisfaction is void and inexecutable.

---