SATPAL KHURANA Vs. BEERWATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner-tenant is aggrieved by an order passed by the learned Additional Rent Controller rejecting his application for leave to defend the eviction petition filed against him by his landlady, respondent herein, for his eviction from the tenanted premises, which is a shop in property no. 667, Jheel Khurenja, Delhi (hereinafter referred to be the tenanted shop) on the ground that she requires the same bona fide for one of her sons to start business to earn more money for her family has been dismissed and he has been ordered to vacate the tenanted premises.

(2.) THE respondent-landlady had sought eviction of the petitioner- tenant alleging in para no. 18 (a) of her eviction petition as under:-

(3.) THE learned Additional Rent Controller, however, vide impugned order dated 29th July, 2010 rejected the leave application of the petitioner- tenant. THE relevant paras of the impugned order wherein the pleas taken by the petitioner-tenant were dealt with and rejected by the learned Additional Rent Controller are reproduced below:-