RAM PRAKASH Vs. RAMAN ARORA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner/landlord is aggrieved by the order dated 05.12.2014 wherein the application filed by the tenant/respondent seeking leave to defend had been granted in his favour. The petitioner is aggrieved by this finding.

(2.) Record discloses that an eviction petition had been filed by the landlord Ram Prakash under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as the DRCA). The property comprised of an L -Shaped hall in property bearing no.4213, Ground Floor, Gali Nihal Singh, Pahari Dhiraj, Delhi. It was described as a commercial godown. It was a single tenancy. The bonafide need of the landlord had been disclosed in para 18 of the eviction petition. The father of the petitioner was the owner of the property and after his death 1/5th of the property devolved upon the petitioner -landlord. A suit for partition was filed inter se the siblings; pursuant thereto a compromise was arrived at and 2/3rd share of the suit property was relinquished/compromised in favour of the petitioner; his two sisters relinquished their shares in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner in terms of the sid compromise became entiled to 1/3rd share in the property bearing No.4212 -4213, Gali Nihal Singh, Pahari Dhiraj, Delhi which included this L -Shaped godown which had been tenanted out to the present tenant.

(3.) At this stage, it would be relevant to note that there is no dispute about the ownership -landlord status of the petitioner.