PHULGITA Vs. KRISHAN KUMAR & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is filed under Section 25-B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') against the judgment of the Additional Rent Controller dated 4.6.2011 by which the Additional Rent Controller dismissed the petition for bona fide necessity on the sole ground that the petitioner is not the owner/landlord of the suit premises. The eviction petition has been dismissed after trial.

(2.) The subject petition for bona fide necessity was filed by the petitioner on the ground that she has purchased the suit property by means of the documentation dated 16.11.1973, and which documents were also registered with the Sub-Registrar. There was a typing mistake as to the property number, and hence the petitioner had filed a civil suit for rectification of the documents, and this suit was decreed in favour of the petitioner by the judgment dated 28.2.2004 passed by the Court of Sh. Rakesh Kumar, Civil Judge, Delhi. Petitioner filed the eviction petition on the ground of bona fide necessity because the petitioner was living in one room only in the same premises bearing House no. M-18, Shastri Nagar, Delhi-110052 and in her family members besides herself there was her married son with two children aged 10 years and 7 years.

(3.) So far as the aspect of bona fide necessity is concerned, nothing was argued before me by the respondent, and which is in view of the fact that the family members of the land lady cannot be denied, more so as in her evidence the landlady has filed and proved the ration card as Ex.PW 1/5A showing the family members. Clearly therefore petitioner has bona fide necessity and admittedly she has no other alternative suitable accommodation.