RC.REV.--304/2016. Case: MOHD. IRFAN & ORS. Vs. ABDUL WAHAB. High Court of Delhi (India)
| Case Number | RC.REV.--304/2016 |
| Citation | NA |
| Judgement Date | September 21, 2017 |
| Court | High Court of Delhi (India) |
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Reserved on: 8 th September, 2017 Pronounced on: 21st September, 2017 + RC REV. 304/2016 & CM No. 21490/2016 (stay)
MOHD. IRFAN & ORS. ..... Appellants
Through: Ms. Zubeda Begum, Ms. Sana
Ansari & Ms. Vaishali Tanwar, Advs.
versus
ABDUL WAHAB ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Amit Chadha, Ms. Shaista
Siddiqui & Ms. Urmiljeet Kaur, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
-
The petition at hand was filed invoking the revisional jurisdiction of this court under Section 25B (8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (for short, “the Act”) to assail the order dated
08.02.2016 of the Additional Rent Controller -1 (Central) on eviction petition (case no. E-249/15/13) of the respondent whereby the application of the petitioners seeking leave to defend was dismissed and in the consequence an order of eviction was passed against them in terms of Section 25B (4) of the Act granting right to recover in favour of the respondent in respect of tenanted premises described as one shop admeasuring about 10 x 12 feet at the ground floor level of
RC Rev. 304/2016 Page 1 of 9
property bearing no. 4355, Kucha Pandit, Shah Ganj, Delhi-110006 shown in colour red in the site plan which was submitted as Annexure to the eviction petition invoking the ground of bonafide requirement under clause (e) of the proviso to Section 14 (1). The eviction petition from which the present proceedings arise, as mentioned above, related to the permissible ground to seek eviction of protected tenant in terms of clause (e) of proviso to Section 14 (1) of the Act, which reads as under:-
“That the premises let for residential purpose are required bona fide by the landlord for occupation as a residence for himself or for any member of his family dependent on him, if he is the owner thereof, or for any person for whose benefit the premises are held and that the landlord or such person has no other reasonably suitable residential accommodation;
Explanation.- For the purpose of this clause, "premises let for residential purposes" include any premises which having been let for use as a residence are, without the consent of the landlord, used incidentally for commercial or other purposes;”
-
From the pleadings of the parties, coupled with documents filed therewith, as indeed the submissions before the Additional Rent Controller, and this Court, it has emerged as undisputed that relationship of tenant and landlord exists between the petitioners on one hand and the respondent on the other vis-à-vis the subject premises, the tenancy concededly being one regulated by the provisions of the Act. The petitioners have also not raised the issue and, therefore, fairly concede that the respondent herein, being the
RC Rev. 304/2016 Page 2 of 9
petitioner seeking eviction by petition before the Additional Rent Controller, is the owner of the subject property.
-
The statutory clause quoted above...
To continue reading
Request your trial