SATYAWATI Vs. BHAGWAT GOEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the judgment dated 3.1.2002 of the learned Additional Rent Controller (for short the 'Controller') dismissing eviction petition of the petitioner filed under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent control Act, 1958 (for short 'the Act').

(2.) Brief facts of the case, as have been noted by the learned Controller, are that :

(3.) It was contended by counsel for the petitioner that the learned Controller has gone wrong in holding that the premises were not let out for residential purpose and also were not required bona fide by the petitioner. The respondent, who appeared in person, on the other hand, contended that the premises were let out for commercial purpose and that he is using the same for running an international consultancy business and also that the petitioner has sufficient accommodation and her requirements are not bona fide. On the question whether the premises are let out for residential purpose or commercial purpose, the Controller held that the respondent has proved that he is running consultancy business from the premises in dispute although the premises in question are in a residential area. From a perusal of the record I find, from the statement of RW-1, the respondent herein, that in his cross-examination he has stated as under :