FARIDA KHANAM Vs. KHWAJA RASHID AHMAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ORDER impugned is the order dated 10.06.2011; eviction petition filed by the landlord under Section 14 (1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act (DRCA) seeking eviction of his tenant i.e. Farida Khanam from a portion of premises bearing No. 2675A, Bada Satghara, Mohalla Niyarian, G.B. Road, Delhi had been decreed in favour of the landlord. The application seeking leave to defend filed by the tenant had been declined.

(2.) RECORD shows that the disputed premises comprise of one room, one kitche, latrine, bathroom and open court yard on the ground floor of the property which had been tenanted out at a monthly rent of Rs. 50/-. There were two petitioners before the trial Court. The family of the first petitioner comprised of himself, his wife, two sons and one daughter i.e. five persons. The family of petitioner No. 2 who at the relevant time was a resident of Bikaner, Rajasthan comprised of herself, her husband, two sons and one daughter i.e. five persons again. Daughter of petitioner No. 2 was doing a post graduate course i.e. master in business administration and her younger son was doing a diploma in D-Pharmacy; her husband had retired; contention was that the family of petitioner No. 2 wished to settle in Delhi and she has no other accommodation except the present premises; because of the non-availability of accommodation in Delhi, she is not able to make arrangements to shift to Delhi. Further contention in the eviction petition was to the effect that petitioner No. 1 in view of the needs of his family required atleast 11 rooms; present accommodation available with them is falling short. The need of petitioner No. 2 has also been depicted to be 12 rooms.

(3.) THE Apex Court in the case of (1987) 4 SCC 193 Smt.Shanti Sharma & Others Vs. Smt. Ved Prabha & Others had an occasion to examine the concept of ,,owner as envisaged under Section 14 (1)(e) of the DRCA. In this context, it had inter-alia noted as under :-