HOT CHAND Vs. DHANPAT RAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition is directed against the order dated 18.07.2009 passed by the learned Additional Rent Controller on a petition preferred by the petitioner/tenant under Section 14 (1)(e) read with Section 25-B of the Delhi Rent Control Act, whereunder an eviction order was passed against him and in favour of the respondents/landlords in respect of the tenanted premises, i.e., one hall on the first floor of premises bearing No. 2915/13, Bahadurgarh Road, Teliwara, Delhi-110 006 along with roof thereof and staircase as shown in the site plan (Ex.PW1/1).

(2.) The petitioner/tenant has assailed the impugned order on two counts. It is firstly argued by the counsel for the petitioner/tenant that the premises in question was admittedly let out for commercial purpose and hence the petition of the respondents/landlords that they require the said premises for their bonafide need of residence, was not maintainable. He urges that as the purpose of letting out the premises was commercial, having failed to seek eviction of the petitioner from the tenanted premises for putting the same to commercial use, the eviction petition was liable to be dismissed.

(3.) The aforesaid argument of the counsel for the petitioner/tenant was considered and dealt with by the learned Additional Rent Controller in para 8 of the impugned order, wherein after taking notice of the fact that the purpose of letting was commercial, reliance was placed on a judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Satyawati Sharma v. UOI, 2008 5 SCC 287 and it was held that in the light of the said judgment, now the purpose of letting had been rendered only of academic interest. In the aforesaid judgment, the Supreme Court held that Section 14 (1)(e) of Delhi Rent Control Act is violative of the doctrine of equality embodied in Article 14 of the Constitution of India insofar as it discriminates between the premises let for residential and non-residential purposes when the same are required bonafide by the landlord for occupation for himself or for any member of his family dependent on him and restricts the latter's right to seek eviction of the tenant from the premises let for residential purpose only.