SUBHASH CHAND GUPTA Vs. YOGINDER KUMAR RAJ KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order impugned before this court is the order dated 16.12.2010 whereby the two applications seeking leave to defend filed by the tenants in pending eviction proceedings under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act (DRCA) had been allowed and leave to defend had been granted in favour of the tenant. Petitioner/landlord is aggrieved by this order.

(2.) The facts emanating are that the petitioner-Subhash Chand Gupta has filed an eviction petition seeking recovery of tenanted shop measuring 98.83 sq. ft. in premises bearing No. 581, Kucha Pati Ram, Bazar Sita Ram, Delhi-110006. The tenant has been described as Yoginder Kumar Raj Kumar. The bonafide requirement of the landlord has been pleaded in para 18(a); contention being that the premises is required bonafide by the landlord for his son Anupam Gupta who is an advocate and dependent upon his father for the purpose of opening his office; landlord is the owner of the disputed premises; he has no other reasonable accommodation for opening the office for his son-Anupam Gupta and as such his need is bonafide. Present eviction petition was accordingly filed.

(3.) Two separate applications seeking leave to defend had been filed by the tenants raising various contentions; it was contented that the petitioner is not the owner of the premises; his need is not bonafide; there is also an alternate accommodation available with the landlord; all these are triable issues and leave to defend should be granted.