VIJAY KUMAR NARANG Vs. USHA RANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In all these cases same questions of fact and laware involved. Hence, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) The appellants are occupying different portions of propertyNo. 15A/36. Western Extension Area, Karol Bagh, New Delhi, as tenantsunder the respondent. The eviction petitions were brought against thesetenants by the landlord on the ground of eviction covered by Clause (k) ofthan proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 14 of the Delhi Rent ControlAct (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').

(3.) The two Courts below have given findings that premises have beenlet out for commercial purposes. It is not in dispute that according to theterms of the lease under which the property is held by the respondent, theproperty could he used only for residential purposes. The ground of evictioncovered by Clause (k) was upheld by both the Courts and there is no challenge to the said findings of the two Courts below. Clause (k) reads asfollows: