MOHD YUNUS Vs. JAI BHAGWAN SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by the order dated 26th March, 2013 declining to grant leave to defend to the Petitioner Mohd. Yunus in an eviction petition filed by the Respondent Jai Bhagwan Sharma under Section 14 (1) (e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (in short 'the DRC Act'), the Petitioner prefers the present petition.

(2.) JAI Bhagwan Sharma had inducted Mohd. Yunus as a tenant in a shop on the ground floor of House No.3045, Street No.223, Tri Nagar, Delhi - 110035 on a monthly rent of Rs.400/ - per month excluding water and electricity charges in the year 1975. In the eviction petition it is stated that Jai Bhagwan Sharma was the owner of the entire suit property and is aged 73 years. His family comprises of his wife, four sons and two daughters. One of his daughters and her husband had already expired and legal guardianship of the children was handed over to Jai Bhagwan Sharma. Besides this the family of the eldest son of Jai Bhagwan Sharma, who was employed, comprised of his wife and two children aged 15 and 13 years. The family of the second son of Jai Bhagwan Sharma, who had no reliable and suitable source of income, comprised of his wife and three children. The third son of Jai Bhagwan Sharma was also unemployed but married with two children. The fourth son of Jai Bhagwan was an architect working in a private company and his family comprised of his wife and two children. The ground floor of the suit property consists of three shops, three small rooms, two small kitchens and a toilet. The first floor had 2/3rd covered portion consisting of three rooms, two kitchens and a toilet. Two rooms on the ground floor were occupied by one son and another room by the second son of Jai Bhagwan Sharma. In the first floor portion, one room was occupied by Jai Bhagwan Sharma and his wife and one room by his third son and the third room by the fourth son and his family. Due to paucity of space the maternal grandchildren of Jai Bhagwan Sharma from his pre -deceased daughter had to be lodged with one of the relatives. There was no space to keep the household goods and therefore, the suit shop was bona fidely required. Further one of the sons of Jai Bhagwan Sharma, that is, Mukesh Kumar was unemployed and wanted to start his own business from the tenanted shop wherein at night the children could also sleep and if need arises the guests could also stay.

(3.) IN the leave to defend application, it was stated that the tenanted premises was let out by Jai Bhagwan Sharma's wife Smt. Premwati in 1973 and Jai Bhagwan was not the owner of the tenanted premises and was merely collecting rent. In the tenanted premises Mohd. Yunus was running a barber shop which was his only source of income and his son had also settled in the said shop. It is stated that Shop No. A, in the suit property which was of similar size was lying vacant and is not being used by Jai Bhagwan Sharma or his family members. In the suit property Jai Bhagwan Sharma was residing with his son Kuldeep and his family and the remaining three sons along with their families were not residing in the suit property. Thus there were sufficient rooms in the suit property which were lying vacant.