PREM CHAND SHARMA AND ORS. Vs. RAM GOPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioners prefer the present writ petition aggrieved by the order dated 4th July, 2014 granting leave to defend to the Respondent in an eviction petition under Section 14 (1) (e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (in short 'the DRC Act') filed by the Petitioners.

(2.) AN eviction petition was filed by Shri Prem Chand Sharma however, during the pendency of the proceedings he passed away whereafter his legal heirs, that is, his daughter -in -law, wife of the pre -deceased son Smt. Pushpa Rani Sharma and his grandson Navneet Kaushik were substituted. In the eviction petition, Prem Chand Sharma claimed himself to be the owner and landlord of the tenanted premises, that is, a shop on the ground floor and mezzanine in the suit property No. 42 -43, U.B. Jawahar Nagar, Delhi on a monthly rent of Rs. 1,250/ - per month wherein Ram Gopal was carrying on his business in the name and style of M/s. Cantabil. In the eviction petition it was stated that the premises was bona fidely required by the Petitioner for starting the business by his daughter -in -law namely Smt. Pushpa Sharma, wife of late Shri Ishwar Chand Sharma as well his grandson Navneet Kaushik who was aged 33 years at that time. The eldest son of Prem Chand Sharma, that is, Ishwar Chand Sharma unfortunately died on 16th February, 2007 leaving behind his widow Smt. Pushpa Sharma and one son Navneet Kaushik and one daughter. Since Smt. Pushpa Sharma had no source of income and wants to start the business of sale of readymade garments in the said shop by employing the staff and Navneet Kaushik. Navneet Kaushik had done hotel management from Bangalore and was in service earlier in Hong Kong from where he has left the job and returned to India in 2007. He will assist his mother in running the business. It was stated that the Petitioner or his family members have no other alternative business premises located in Main Bazar, Kamla Nagar, Delhi where there are various shops. The daughter -in -law of the Petitioner and her son had sufficient means to start the business.

(3.) IN the reply to the leave to defend application Prem Chand Sharma denied the sale consideration of Rs. 57,20,000/ - and that no Agreement to Sell was entered into between the parties and that in view of the last rent Agreement dated 14th July, 2008 the landlord -tenant relationship was established and the plea of Ram Gopal was frivolous. It was denied that Navneet Kaushik has taken citizenship of Hong Kong and it was stated that at the time of filing of the petition he was very much in India however, as no business premises was available he again joined the service at Hong Kong but he wants to permanently settle in India. Navneet Kaushik has not obtained citizenship of Hong Kong. It was further stated that Smt. Pushpa Sharma was residing on the first floor of the suit premises however, she was not doing any business or having any income from any paying guests. Prem Chand Sharma claimed that the property had been partitioned and the portions thereto had fallen into the share of his brother Mohan Pratap Chand Kaushik.