ISHWAR DAYAL KANSAL Vs. A K JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Section 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 is filed by the petitioner/tenant impugning the judgment of the Additional Rent Controller dated 18.8.2011 by which the Additional Rent Controller has dismissed the application for leave to defend filed by the petitioner and decreed the eviction petition with respect to the tenanted premises being property no.4499-4500, 7/35, Ansari Road, Daryaganj, New Delhi-2 (shown in red colour in the site plan exhibit 'X').

(2.) The case of the respondent/landlord is that he needs the suit/tenanted premises for the office use of himself and his wife. The tenanted premises are adjacent to the premises where the respondent/landlord is living at 4498, 7/35, Ansari Road, Darya Ganj, Delhi. The tenanted premises are required because the respondent and his wife are running their firms at the premises at 44-45, New Okhla Industrial Complex, DSIDC Phase-I, New Delhi and which premises are very far off from the residence of the respondent/landlord, and hence the respondent and his wife have to travel at least about 40-50 kms daily up and down, causing them great inconvenience in their old age. It was also pleaded that the DSIDC premises have to be vacated because already eviction notices have been served upon the respondent under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971. Need was also prayed for the daughter of the respondent Ms. Snigdha Jain who was pursuing Masters in Architecture in London. The petition also prayed for eviction for the need of the son of the respondent Dr. Semant Jain who was planning to come from US.

(3.) At the outset, I would like to note that at the request of the counsel for the respondent/landlord, I am treating the eviction petition only for the bonafide need of the respondent and his wife and not for the daughter and the son.