DHARMARTH AUSHDHALAYA PARBANDHAK COMMITTEE Vs. MOOL RAJ AGGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision petition filed by the Petitioner under Section 25B (8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 against the order dated 19-02-10 passed by the Additional Rent Controller whereby an eviction order was passed against it in respect of a portion of premises No. E-5/5, Krishna Nagar, Delhi-110051 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the tenanted premises') after dismissing its application for grant of leave to contest the eviction petition filed on the ground of bona fide requirement by the Respondent herein.

(2.) The Petitioner-tenant has been running a charitable dispensary in the tenanted premises for over forty years. Municipal Corporation of Delhi has been giving some financial aid to the Petitioner-tenant for the running of the charitable dispensary. As per the case of the Respondent, the said property belonged to his father and after his death a partition suit was filed in Court in which a decree of partition had been passed in the year 2007 according to which he had become the exclusive owner of the tenanted premises in the possession of the Petitioner-tenant herein on the ground floor as also of one room and a store room etc. on the backside of the tenanted premises and the first floor portion.

(3.) After the decision of the partition suit amongst the legal heirs of the deceased owner-landlord Sri Ram the Respondent filed an eviction petition in the year 2008 against the Petitioner herein on the ground that he required the tenanted premises bona fide for opening a stationery shop for himself as well as well for his son who was employed on a meagre salary of Rs. 6000/- p.m. It was pleaded in the eviction petition by the Respondent that he was a school teacher and had retired on 31/10/06 and after his retirement was doing nothing since he did not have any place to start his work. Now he needed a place to start his own work along with his son, who was about 32 years of age and was getting only Rs. 6000/- per month as salary. In the tenanted premises he wanted to start a shop for sale of books and stationery as 4-5 schools are situated in the vicinity and there was no other accommodation with him from where he could run the shop and the room and one store in his possession on the backside of the tenanted portion was not suitable for running the shop since there is no direct approach to that portion.