RIYAZUDDIN Vs. SAIRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the order dated 1 st December, 2014 whereby leave to defend was declined to the petitioners in an eviction petition filed by the respondents i.e. the legal heirs of late Shri Ahsan Elahi under Section 14(1)(e) of the DRC Act, the petitioners prefer the present petition.

(2.) In the eviction petition it was pleaded by Ms.Saira and others, legal heirs of late Shri Ahsan Elahi, that they were the owners and landlord in respect of the tenanted shop measuring 116 sq.yds. on the ground floor of property bearing No. 7609, Quresh Nagar, Sadar Nala Road, Sadar Bazar. It is stated that grandfather and grandmother of respondents No. 2 to 9 and father-in-law and mother-in-law of respondent No.1 were the owners of suit property which devolved on Shri Ahsan Elahi pursuant to compromise agreement between late Shri Ahsan Elahi and Smt. Mussavira Khatoon whereby she extinguished her share in the suit property. After the death of Shri Ahsan Elahi the suit property devolved on the respondents being his legal heirs. Relevant documents in this regard were placed on record.

(3.) In the eviction petition it was claimed that the tenanted premises was required for the professional needs of respondents No.7 & 8 as respondent No.7 was a practicing lawyer since 1998 in Delhi and was carrying on his office from a small place of 6 feet x 12 feet on the ground floor of property bearing No. 7386 Quresh Nagar, Sadar Bazar. The one room on the first floor of the said property i.e. 7381-7386 was being used as residence for respondent No.7. The second floor of the said property which consists of one room was being used for residential purposes by respondent No.8 along with his family and the third floor by respondent No.9 and his family members. The said property comprises of two shops and one office on the ground floor. One shop measuring 8 feet x 12 feet on the ground floor was in possession of respondent No.9 who was running the business of general store and another shop measuring 3 feet x 6 feet was in possession of joint tenants i.e. Mohd. Furkan, Mohd. Sadiq and Mohd. Aftab. The suit property was required as respondent No.7 had no separate room for sitting of his clerks, waiting of the clients, consultation, office room etc. He also owned car and scooter which were parked on the road and in case the tenanted premises was available the same could be re-constructed and used for garage as well. Respondent No.8 is a practicing doctor in modern as well as Unani medicines having passed BUMS degree in 1997 and started his practice in 1998. Respondent No.8 was doing his practice from rented accommodations since 1998 and was presently running his clinic from tenanted premises bearing No. 1071, Main Road, Farash Khanna for which he was paying use and occupation charges.