KHEM CHAND Vs. ARJUN JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed by the petitioners under section 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") assailing the order dated 3 rd May, 2012 passed by the learned SCJCUM-RC (South), Delhi dismissing the leave to defend application of the petitioners herein who were respondent No.1 to 8 before the Rent Controller.

(2.) Brief facts of the matter are that respondent No.1 (petitioner therein) filed an eviction petition against the petitioners and respondent No. 9 therein i.e. Shri Gurdarshan Singh Uppal under Section 14 (1)(e) read with Section 25B of the Act in respect of property bearing No. 10 Sunder Nagar Market, Sunder Nagar, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the "tenanted premises") as he required the same for commercial purposes for himself and for other family members dependent upon him. It was stated by the respondent No. 1 that his family comprised of himself, his parents, his wife, one daughter and two sons. It was contended that the daughter of the respondent No.1 had joined him and was helping him in his jewellery business which was being carried out by him in the name and style of M/s Padma Gems from a tenanted property in a neighboring shop No. 9A, Sunder Nagar Market, Sunder Nagar, New Delhi and an eviction petition in respect of this shop was already pending adjudication before Sh. Balwant Rai Bansal ARC (South), New Delhi in the matter titled as Shiv Pratap Seonie v. Narendra Kumar Jain.

(3.) It was also stated in the eviction petition that there is bonafide need in as much as the sons of respondent No. 1, Akshay and Abhay who have done courses in DRAM S-21, improvisational Acting and FINC-S-158, International Business from Harvard University in 2009, would either join him in his business or start their own business. It was further also stated that the premises available with the respondent No. 1 were not sufficient for himself and for the family members dependent upon him and hence he required the tenanted premises bonafidely for himself and for his family members dependent upon him as he has no other alternative accommodation available to him.