INDU NAGPAL & ANR Vs. SURINDER MOHAN BHANDARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Caveat No.779/2014

(2.) The impugned judgment decrees the eviction petition with respect to the suit/tenanted premises comprising of two rooms, one WC, one bathroom, one kitchen and open varandah on the ground floor in the premises no.L-32, Kalkaji, New Delhi as shown in red colour in the site plan annexed with the eviction petition.

(3.) The bonafide necessity eviction petition was filed by the respondent/landlord stating that he had with him only one bedroom, one drawing-cum-dining room with amenities of kitchen, bathroom etc on the ground floor and one store and a small toilet with an open varandah in the premises on the first floor and the said accommodation is grossly insufficient for the respondent/landlord because the respondent/landlord in his family besides himself has one younger son aged 21 years, one another elder married son and one married daughter aged 51 years. The respondent/landlord further stated that since he required one room for himself, one for his younger son, one for his grand son, one guest room and one servant room because a servant is required who cannot be kept because of paucity of space, besides the amenities of drawing-cum-dining room, kitchen, bathroom etc., the respondent/landlord therefore was short of accommodation because the requirement was of at least four bedrooms but the respondent/landlord had only one bedroom, and hence the bonafide necessity eviction petition.