MUKUND KRISHNA BARMAN Vs. SURENDER KUMAR MALHOTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This rent control revision petition filed under Section 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') impugns the judgment of the Additional Rent Controller (ARC) dated 26.4.2013 by which the ARC has dismissed the leave to defend application and has decreed the bonafide necessity eviction petition filed under Section 14(1)(e) of the Act with respect to a portion of the ground floor of house no.E-5/33, Krishna Nagar, Delhi-51 as shown in red colour in the site plan filed with the eviction petition.

(2.) I may note that the eviction petition was originally filed by the erstwhile respondent/landlord Sh.Surender Kumar Malhotra, who was 83 years of age and who needed the ground floor portion because at his advance age and suffering from various ailments, it was not possible for him to climb to the first floor, and therefore the need was projected for the original landlord Sh.Surender Kumar Malhtora with respect to the suit/tenanted premises which is situated on the ground floor.

(3.) In the eviction petition, besides the projected need of the original landlord, the need was also projected for the sons and daughter who were to visit the erstwhile landlord Sh.Surender Kumar Malhotra. Since the original respondent/landlord Sh.Surender Kumar Malhotra has now expired, therefore, the eviction petition so far as his need is concerned would no longer survive, however, the issue and the question is that whether any other need has been projected by the erstwhile respondent/landlord for the requirement of any members of his family, and for whose needs therefore the eviction petition will survive.