SHARDA DEVI Vs. AKSHAY KHANDELWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision petition filed under Section 115 CPC read with Section 25-B (8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 by virtue of which the petitioner has challenged the order dated 13.10.2014 passed by the learned Additional Rent Controller, Central, granting leave to defend to the respondent/tenant.

(2.) The reason for grant of leave to defend to the respondent/tenant by the learned Additional Rent Controller is on account of the fact that it has been admitted by the petitioner/landlord that the son of the petitioner, for whose benefit the accommodation has been claimed, is running an independent business of tents from the first floor of property No.3677 in the same locality. The said business in the nature of partnership firm is being carried out by the two sons of the petitioner namely Sh. Deepak Mehra and Sh. Nitin Mehra. The business has extended to such an extent that not only the son of the petitioner has purchased a shop bearing No.5 in property No.2287/42, Kouria Pul but even the daughter-in-law has also purchased two shops in property bearing No.2287/41, Kouria Pul, Delhi. It has been stated that all the aforesaid shops are being put to use by the petitioner's son for his partnership business. It is averred that the premise presently being used for the business is insufficient to meet the requirements therefore an additional accommodation being the tenanted premise is required for use as godown. In such a contingency, the case of the petitioner for bona fide requirement to seek eviction of the respondent/tenant from a place in the suit premises for the purpose of storing of goods was held to be a triable issue by the learned Additional Rent Controller.

(3.) The aforesaid reasoning has been assailed by the learned counsel for the petitioner before this court on the ground that the Ld. ARC on an erroneous interpretation of law has wrongly held that a financially independent person will not be dependent for the purpose of accommodation on the petitioner/landlord. The petitioner in support of his contention has relied upon judgments of this court in Major General A.K. Verma AVSM (Retd.) & Another vs. Narinder Singh, 2004 110 DLT 226, Labhu Lal vs. Sandhya Gupta, 2010 173 DLT 318, Agya Ram Arora vs. Surjeet Mech. Tools, 2015 220 DLT 245 and Vinod Arora vs. Deepak Aggarwal, 2010 172 DLT 112.