DELHI COMMERCIAL PRESS Vs. ROOP KISHORE RASTOGI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present Civil Revision Petition has been preferred U/S 25-B(8) of Delhi Rent Control Act (herein after referred to as "Act") against the order dated 19.05.2011 passed by the Ld. Additional Rent Controller (ARC) wherein, the leave to defend application filed by the petitioner in eviction petition E-167/2008 was dismissed and eviction order under Section 14(1) (e) of the Act was passed in favour of the respondent in respect of suit <DJG> PROPERTY BEARING NO.15, GROUND FLOOR, M.C.D.NO.1589AND1590, M.J.</DJG> Building, Bhagirath Palace, Chandni Chowk, Delhi.

(2.) THE suit property consists of one big office which comprises of two rooms measuring 16'.3" x 22'.9" and one kothri measuring 7'x7' and one verandah in front side of the office. In the eviction petition, it was stated that the suit property was let out to the petitioner for commercial purposes and the same was now required by the respondent for starting a business of wholesale and retail electrical goods. It was further stated that the respondent was residing with his mother at Gurgaon and tried to carry on his business from there, but could not obtain any licence to carry out a business; the premises being residential. The non-availability of any other suitable commercial property, except the suit property, was also pleaded by the respondent.

(3.) THE impugned order has been challenged by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner on the ground that it is bad in law as the learned ARC had failed to take note of various triable issues raised by the petitioner and had erred in not taking note of the fact that the respondent was in possession of several other properties sufficient for meeting his alleged requirement. The properties alleged to be in possession of the respondent are :