ANMOL KUMAR Vs. TRILOK CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed under Order 22 Rule 10A read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the said Code) on the ground that the eviction petition was contested only by respondent Nos.1 to 3 and thus it is not necessary to implead the legal heirs of deceased respondent Nos.4 and 5 who were ex parte before the Trial Court and whose legal heirs have not been traced out.

(2.) In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed.

(3.) The petitioners have filed an eviction petition under Section 14(1)(e) read with Section 25B of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) against the respondents in respect of a garage in premises No.25/151, Shakti Nagar, Delhi. It was stated in the petition that the premises were let out for residential purposes but were being misused by running a printing press. The property was stated to have been purchased by the petitioners from the previous owner Shri Som Dutt vide Sale Deed dated 2.1.1981 and the total property consists of a house in which this garage is located. The allegation of the petitioners is that respondents have even caused damages to the tenanted premises by reason of running of the printing press. The garage was stated to be required bonafide by the petitioners for parking their car No.DHA 5435 as there was no other reasonable suitable premises for parking the car. In the written statement the respondents took a stand that the printing press was in existence from the very beginning and thus the property was let out for commercial purposes. It is alleged that the whole of the property is commercial and the petitioners have sufficient space in the property to park their vehicle. Leave to defend was granted to the respondents and after trial in terms of the impugned judgement dated 27.2.1998 of the Additional Rent Controller the eviction petition has been dismissed.