V RAMANATHAN Vs. KALAWATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is directed against the order of Shri P.K. Bhari, Rent Control Tribunal, Delhi, dated 23rd November, 1977 (As his lordship then was) ordering ejectment of the appellant on the ground of bona fide personal requirements of the respondents.

(2.) The appellant has filed an application for leading additional evidence by way of subsequent events to show that the respondents now do not require any further accommodation for bona fide' requirement after the passing of impugned order. If the position had remained static after passing of the order by the learned Rent Control Tribunal, there is nothing which could have been argued on behalf of the appellant but there have been subsequent events and today the position is that the landlady has died. Five daughters have also been married and the family of the landlord now consists of landlord himself with one son and married wife and one minor child. The accommodation with the landlord as per the plan now consists of two rooms kitchen, W.C., bath, store and a verandah. The size of the rooms on the ground floor is 14'. 1 "X 13'. 3" and the second room is 14'x8'.7".The verandah is 14'. 1 " X 5' 2" alongwith open court-yard measuring 13'. 3" X 14' 1 ". The W.C. and bath room are separate from these rooms. The landlord has also got whole of the first floor which includes one room measuring 14' X 9' 4' ' and the second room is 14'. 1 " X 8' 1 ", verandah 14"X 1 X 5' 2", kitchen 5' 9'' X 5' 2'' and a bath room 7' 1 "X 7'3" and a third room measuring 12' 3 2 X 7'. This room is converted into a store room. The position is that the landlord has four different rooms besides store rooms, two verandahs, kitchens, two bath rooms and one W.C. This, to my mind for a family of the landlord, is more than sufficient for their requirement. Mr. Vats, learned counsel for the landlord submits that the landlord needs some place for visiting married daughters, to my mind the accommodation with the landlord is more than sufficient to accommodate visiting daughters as well. It is well established principle that while dealing with the appolication under clause (e) of the proviso to subsection (1) of Section 14 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1,958, the appellate court is entitled to look into subsequents events in order to mould the relief. The fact of death of the landlady and the marriage of the five daughters is admitted. When the order was passed by the Tribunal, the landlady was alive and she has also three unmarried daughters to accommodate. Now the requirement has decreased because the landlady has died and the remaining unmarried daughters have been married out. The result is that the respondents have more than sufficient accommodation in their possession and do not require any additional accommodation. The appeal thus succeeds. The impugned order of the learned Rent Control Tribunal is set aside in view of the subsequent events.

(3.) Parties are left to bear their own costs of the present proceedings. .