A K KAKAR Vs. SHEELA KHANNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE order impugned before this court is the order dated 23.09.2011 vide which the eviction petition filed by the landlady Smt. Sheela Khanna widow of Late. Sh. Dwarka Nath Khanna against her tenant Dr. A.K. Kakkar who was running a Dental Clinic from the disputed premises (a shop located in property bearing No. 23/19, East Patel Nagar Market, New Delhi) had been decreed. THE application seeking leave to defend filed by the tenant had been dismissed.

(2.) RECORD shows that the eviction petition had been filed by the landlady claiming herself to be the owner of the disputed premises which had been let out to the tenant vide a registered lease deed dated 20.07.1963. Contention was that the premises are required bonafide for running a business of Harware and Pipe Fittings which is proposed to be run by her son Rakesh Khann who is residing with her and is dependent upon her. Contentions as borne out from the eviction petition are that the landlady is a widow; she has two sons, namely, Yashpal Khanna and Rakesh Khanna; Rakesh Khanna is stated to be out of job; earlier he was running a business with his brother-Yashpal Khanna in partnership at 38, Shankar Market, Connaught Place, New Delhi from where he has retired on 31.03.2005. The dissolution deed of the partnership between Yashpal Khanna and Rakesh Khanna is on record substantiating this submission that this business of the two sons of the landlady finally stood dissolved with effect from 31.03.2005. There is also no dispute to this contention. Further contention of the landlady is that she alongwith her son Rakesh Khanna had thereafter shifted to Gurgaon as he had started his new business of hardware and pipe fittings under the name and style of 'M/s. M.G. Hardware' at Gurgaon; the fact that she was residing at Gurgaon with her son Rakesh Khanna has also been substantiated by the fact that the present petitioner i.e. tenant-A.K. Kakkar had in this intervening period continued to pay rent to her at her residence at Gurgaon. This factual position is also not disputed. It is also not in dispute that in fact Rakesh Khann was filing his Income Tax Return at Gurgaon and last return filed by him is dated 31.03.2009; a perusal of this document has revealed that the income of Rakesh Khanna was about Rs. 47,000/- per annum which was for the year ending March 2009. This document is also not in dispute.

(3.) ALTHOUGH the averments made in the application for leave to defend also state that the conduct of the petitioner has been fraudulent and the documents which he has filed in support of his petition are fraudulent yet no such argument has been addressed before this court today. Submissions which have been urged and argued vehemently before this court have been outlined above.