PARMANAND Vs. SUMAN SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition is directed against the order dated 4.2.2010, by which the learned Additional Rent Controller has rejected the leave to defend application filed by the petitioner/tenant in respect of two shops situated in the premises bearing No. K-13, Navin Shahdara, Delhi.

(2.) As per the averments made by the respondents/landlords, in the eviction petition filed by them under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, the aforesaid two shops are bonafide required by them for the purposes of carrying out commercial activities.

(3.) At the outset, counsel for the petitioner/tenant confines the challenge laid to the impugned order to the findings returned by the learned Additional Rent Controller, as mentioned at page 24 of the impugned order, wherein reference is made to the fact that the respondents have one godown on the ground floor of the suit premises, which is under the tenancy of another tenant, Sh. Narendra Kumar Dhunna. It is stated that though the respondents had made a mention of the said godown in the eviction petition and in his leave to defend application, the petitioner/tenant had taken a stand that the respondents had not made any effort to get the said godown vacated, however, during the pendency of the eviction petition, the respondents had succeeded in their eviction petition in respect of the said godown. As a result, order dated 20.10.2009 came to be passed by the learned Additional Rent Controller dismissing the leave to defend application filed by the tenant therein, Shri Narender Kumar Dhunna.