RAGHUBIR SINGH AGGARWAL Vs. VIRENDER KUMAR JAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The landlord is the petitioner. He sought eviction of the tenant under Section 14(l)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (here inafter called the Act) on the ground that he requires additional accommodation and therefore his requirement is a bonafide requirement.

(2.) As usual the respondent tenant opposed the prayer. The Trial Court has accepted the contention of the respondent resulting in the dismissal of the eviction petition. Hence this revision petition.

(3.) A few facts are to be noted here. The landlord is also residing in the same building and according to the landlord he is inoccupation of three rooms only. The finding is that his family consists of himself, his wife, 2 major sons, out of whom one was married already and a grown updaughter. The tenanted premises consist of two rooms and there are six members in the family of the tenant. Inview of the growth of the children and the need to provide proper accommodation to all the members the landlord sought eviction of the respondent.The landlord also pleaded that his parents are old and they have come to reside with him, and that he has 5 married sisters who frequently visit him.