SANJEEV SOOD & ORS Vs. RAVI KANTA MADHOK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CAVEAT 421/2015

(2.) Smt. Ravi Kanta Madhok filed an eviction petition under Section 14(1)(e) DRC Act for eviction of petitioners i.e. Sanjeev Sood, Amit Sood and Smt. Rachna Chawla all legal heirs of late Shri Lakhpat Rai Sood who was a tenant in respect of Shop No.2 in House No.11/4, West Patel Nagar i.e. the tenanted premises on the ground of bonafide commercial requirement of landlord's son, daughter-in-law and grandson. It was stated that Smt. Ravi Kanta Madhok was the owner and landlady of the entire suit property which comprises of three commercial shops abutting the Main Bazar, West Patel Nagar, New Delhi. The first floor of the suit property was being used for residential purposes for herself and her family. The tenanted shop had been let out to Shri Lakhpat Rai Sood 48 years ago by father-in-law of Smt. Ravi Kanta Madhok. After her father-in-law, mother-in-law and the husband expired Smt. Ravi Kanta Madhok became the owner and landlady of the property. The residential premises on the ground floor of the suit property had been let out to one Smt. Leela Singh in the year 2003 who was residing there and occupying one small room, verandah with toilet and kitchen. Further petitioner filed eviction petition in respect of other two shops i.e. shop No. 1 and 3 as well which were in occupation of other tenants. It is stated that the son, daughter-in-law and grandson of Smt. Ravi Kant are LIC agents and they require the tenanted shops and other space for running their own offices. The grandson was 23 years old and thus requires space to run his own business besides being LIC agent. All her family members are dependent on her and have no other alternative accommodation.

(3.) In the written statement filed the main contention of the respondent was that the son, grandson and daughter-in-law of Smt. Ravi Kant were not LIC agents and the petition had been filed malafidely to take advantage of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Satyawati Sharma (Dead) By Lrs vs Union Of India & Another, 2008 AIR(SC) 3148 The contractual tenancy of Smt. Leela Singh who is a tenant in the rear portion of the ground floor had expired in 2004 and thus she could have been evicted easily. In an earlier eviction petition, the Court held that Smt. Ravi Kant Madhok had sufficient alternative accommodation and that she had re-let the premises to the other tenant. Thus, the petition was barred by res-judicata as the earlier eviction petition was dismissed on 6th October, 2003.