RAJINDER KUMAR ARORA Vs. RAJNI GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Section 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') is filed challenging the impugned judgment of the Additional Rent Controller dated 08.11.2012 by which the Additional Rent Controller has dismissed the leave to defend application filed by the petitioner/tenant and has decreed the bonafide necessity eviction petition with respect to the suit/tenanted premises being one shop on the ground floor of property no.509, Teliwara, Shahdara, Delhi 32.

(2.) In a petition under Section 14(1)(e) of the Act, there are three requirements which have to be seen. Firstly, it is to be shown that the petitioner who has filed the eviction petition is the owner/landlord of the premises, secondly, it has to be shown that the tenanted premises are required bonafidely for the need of the landlord and/or his family members, thirdly, it is to be seen whether the landlord has any other alternative suitable accommodation.

(3.) Before me in the present case the only issue which is argued, and therefore has to be considered by this Court, is that whether the respondent/landlady has alternative suitable premises from where the business as stated in the eviction petition can be carried out.