LAWS(DLH)-2012-4-419

S. HARBANT SINGH SAHNI Vs. VINOD SIKARI

Decided On April 25, 2012
S. Harbant Singh Sahni Appellant
V/S
Vinod Sikari Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The impugned judgment is dated 16.1.2010. Vide the impugned order, the application filed by the tenant seeking leave to defend in a pending proceedings under Section 14 (1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act (DRCA) had been granted and the defendant was permitted to defend his case. This is the grievance of the petitioner who is the landlord before this Court. Record shows that the present eviction petition has been filed by two petitioners of whom petitioner No. 1 has a son namely Harjot Singh for whose business establishment the present disputed premises is required; petitioner No. 2 is a bachelor. Contention in the eviction petition is that Harjot (son of petitioner No. 1) aged 30 years wishes to carry on a retail business; the disputed premises are shop located on the ground floor of property bearing No. 7-A/2, WEA, Channa Market, Karol Bagh, New Delhi; contention in the eviction petition is that the petitioners who are the owner of the said premises by virtue of succession after the death of their mother Smt. Jaswant Kaur require these premises for starting the business of Harjot (the son of petitioner No. 1) who is presently unemployed. Eviction petition was accordingly filed.

(2.) Leave to defend has been filed and the averments contained therein have been perused. By and large the contention raised is that the need of the petitioners is malafide for the reason that the petitioners are themselves doing their lodging business from the other floors of the property; there are other two shops besides the present shop; Harjot is also doing the business of lodging and is assisting his father in the business and earning a handsome amount by letting out rooms which are situated on the other floors of the property; premises are thus not required bona fide by the petitioners.

(3.) Inspite of the matter having been remained on the board (taken up in the category of "senior citizens"), none has appeared for the respondent since morning; none had appeared on the earlier dates also.