PREM KAUR Vs. J S GULERIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) [Ed. facts : Petitioner owns suit building. She is living in the ground floor with her married son, married grandson, a grand daughter (28 years old) ; another son's wife and latter's son aged 17 years. Accommodation on the ground floor with the petitioner consists of a Drawing room, a Dining room and 3 bed rooms. She filed a petition u/S. 14(l)(e) &25B of DRC Act in Dec., 89. Tenant was granted leave to defend on 23.2.91. She then withdrew the petition on 13.8.91 with permission to file afresh, She then filed the present petition on 9.10.91. Tenant applied for leave to defend contending that as he had earlier been granted leave to defend, same should now automatically be granted ARC agreed and granted leave to defend on 6.2.95 ignoring the plea of the landlady that there had been change of circumstances for the 2nd petition.] After detailing above. Judgment proceeds :

(2.) The accommodation on the ground floor of the property which is available with the landlady consists of a drawing room, a dining room and two regular bed rooms with attached toilets. There is another room which according to the landlady is a study. It is shown as a study in the sanctioned plan copy whereof is on record. However, according to the respondents, it is a bed room with attached toilet or bath room to this room. The learned counsel for the petitioner conceded at the time of hearing that for the sake of argument, this portion of the property in suit may be counted as a bed room. This means that accommodation on the ground floor comprises of three bed rooms (counting the room which is marked as study) besides a drawing room and a dining room. There is also a garrage on the ground floor.

(3.) The second floor of the suit property is also in possession of the landlady. It consists of a barsati of the size of 1 - ft. X 11 ft. According to the learned counsel for the respondents, this barsati portion consists of two rooms while according to the learned counsel for the petitioner landlady it is only one room. In this connection, the learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to (he sanctioned oF plan which shows barsati as only one room. Apart from this, a copy of the eviction order passed against the tenant who was earlier occupying that barsati shows that the second floor accommodation consists of barsati only measuring 18' X 11' with a bathroom having temporary asbestos sheets roof and an open lavatory. Thus, the accommodation on the second floor is really a big barsati without a regular toilet and bath. If the above barsati is to be used as a bed room, the least that is required is a toilet and a bath room. The landlady cannot be expected to be using an open lavatory. These are the facts as they exist today. [Paras 8 & 9 relate to previous petition],