KISHORE Vs. PRABODH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this common order the aforementioned two revision petitions under Section 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act (for short 'the Act') are being disposed as common questions of law and fact are arising out of two separate orders, both dated 10.02.2012, of Additional Rent Controller.

(2.) The petitioners are tenants under the respondents. Petitioner Kishore is a tenant in respect of Shop No. 33-E, whereas petitioner Trilok Singh is a tenant in respect of Shop No. 33-D, South Patel Nagar Market, New Delhi. Their evictions are sought from the tenanted shops on the ground of bonafide requirement thereof by the respondents for their commercial requirements. Respondent No. 1 Prabodh Kumar is stated to be running a confectionary business at Shop No. 33-C, which is adjoining the tenanted shops. The case as set up by the respondents is that the tenanted shops are required for expanding the confectionary business as the space available with the respondent No. 1 is not sufficient It is also their case that he wants to set up an eating joint for his grown up son, and that they have no other suitable commercial space.

(3.) The petitioners filed leave to defend application on various grounds. They denied the respondent No. 1 to be requiring the tenanted shops for expanding his confectionary business or for his son to set up business of eating joint. It is alleged that the present shop available with the respondent No. 1 is quite spacious for his business and that his son is a school going boy, and not grown up enough to set up his own business.