LAWS(DLH)-2024-3-28

GOPAL KRISHAN Vs. VIJAY KUAMR AGGARWAL

Decided On March 12, 2024
GOPAL KRISHAN Appellant
V/S
Vijay Kuamr Aggarwal Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These applications filed on behalf of the petitioners (tenants) in these petitions under proviso to Sec. 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act are based on similar factual and legal matrix, so taken up together. I heard learned counsel for both sides.

(2.) Succinctly stated, circumstances relevant for adjudication of these applications are as follows.

(3.) During arguments on these applications, learned counsel for the applicants contended that out of 150 shops in the larger premises, almost 120 are now either in possession of the non-applicants or the same were re-let after being vacated, and this would be a relevant factor in order to ascertain continuation of the alleged bona fide requirement till disposal of the present revision petitions. On the other hand, learned counsel for non-applicants contended that such events of the alleged vacation of shops, followed by the alleged re-letting thereof during pendency of these revision proceedings cannot be allowed to be taken on record because having obtained stay on the operation of the impugned eviction orders, the applicants aim to protract these proceedings perpetually in the name of subsequent events.