LAXMI NARAIN Vs. BHAGWANTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision petition under section 25-B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 against the order dated 25.05.2009 passed by learned Additional Rent Controller dismissing the application filed by the petitioner-tenant seeking leave to defend the eviction petition filed by his landlady, respondent herein, in respect of one room on the ground floor of premises bearing no. 2937, Arya Nagar, Subzi Mandi, Delhi under Section 14(1)(e). As a result of dismissal of the leave application eviction order has been passed against the petitioner-tenant.

(2.) THE respondent-landlady, who has died after filing of the present petition and is now being represented by her legal representatives, had sought eviction of the petitioner on the ground that she required the premises under the tenancy of the petitioner for herself and her four sons and their families out whom two sons were living separately as they could not be accommodated in property no. 2937 due to shortage of space there. She also pleaded that earlier there were seven tenants in all in her house, including the petitioner herein, and out of them six had been got evicted and now the petitioner herein was the only tenant who remained to be evicted. It was her further case that as she herself was not in a condition to climb stairs because of her old age she was living with one of her four sons Bhimsen in Vikaspuri but that son had got transferred to Hyderabad and so she wanted to shift to her house and to live with her children but there was no other room available for her on the ground floor in house no.2937. It was also her case that on the ground floor of said the property there were six rooms in all, including the one under the tenancy of the petitioner herein, and out of five rooms one was not worth living because the same was filled with waste wooden furniture etc. of her two sons who were not living in the said house due to shortage of space, the second room was kept for the guests of the family, third room was pooja room , the fourth room was used by her son Dharam Veer for storing his house-hold goods and the fifth room was used by another son Om Prakash Narang who was not having good health and was suffering from hypertension and breathing problems. It was also the landlady's case that on the first floor she had eight rooms but those rooms were already occupied by the families of her two sons Om Parkash and Dharam Vir and in any case those rooms were not useful for her as she was unable to climb stairs and she required ground floor accommodation.

(3.) FEELING aggrieved the petitioner had approached this Court by filing this revision petition but after filing this revision petition he was evicted through execution proceedings. However, the counsel of the petitioner had pressed for hearing of the revision petition in the hope that if he succeeds then petitioner might get back the possession of the tenanted premises.