RAMESHWAR SARUP BHATNAGAR Vs. RAM NARAIN ARORA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the judgment of the Addl.Rent Controller, Delhi dated 29.8.1985. By the impugned judgment the eviction petition filed by the petitioner under section 14(l)(e) read with Section 25 B of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was dismissed;

(2.) Rameshwar Sarup Bhatnagar who had filed the eviction petition died on 24.7.1994 during the pendency of the present petition. His legal heirs were duly brought on record vide order dated 26.8.1994. The amended memo of parties was filed alongwith the application for bringing the' legal heirs on record.

(3.) Briefly stated the facts are that the tenancy premises was let out to respondent No.1 by late Shri Din Dayal Bhatnagar, father of Shri Rameshwar Sarup Bhatnagar and father-in-law of the present petitioner No.1. According to petitioner the premises was let out for residential purpose and was being used as such by respondent No.l. In terms of a Will left behind by Din Dayal Bhatnagar the entire property had devolved on Rameshwar Sarup Bhatnagar, his son, after death of Din Dayal Bhatnagar which took place on 10.8.1980. However, in order to avoid all possible objections the daughter of Din Dayal Bhatnagar, namely, Krishna Kumari Bhatnagar was also impleaded as a party. She is respondent No.2in the present petition. It is the case of the petitioner that the premises under the tenancy of respondent No.1 is bona fide required for himself and his family members dependent upon him. Family of the petitioner consisted of himself, his wife, three daughters and one son. The eviction petition was filed on 27th April 1993 and at that time the ages of the children of the petitioner were between 14 years and three and half years which means that now after passage of about 12 years their ages should be between 26 years to 16 years. The petitioner had also pleaded that Shri Kishan Sarup Bhatnagar, brother of petitioner's wife had been residing with the petitioner for last more than three years having a common mess and, therefore, his requirement of accommodation should also be considered as a part of family of the petitioner. The family of the petitioner now consists of the widow of the original petitioner and four children who are in the age group of 26 years to 16 years. Besides this there Kishan Sarup Bhatnagar brother of wife of deceased Rameshwer Sarup Bhatnagar. So far as the accommodation available with the petitioners is concerned they have only ground floor of the property in dispute in their possession which consists of two rooms, one kitchen, one varandah, latrine and bath. Respondent No.1 contested the petition on the following grounds:-