RAKESH KUMAR SEHGAL Vs. NEM CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition by the tenant under Section 25-B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act is directed against the eviction order dated 29.2.1984.

(2.) THE respondent-landlord filed a petition under Section 14(1)(e) read was Section 25-B of the Delhi Rent Control Act on the allegations that he was residing in a rented accommodation and he wanted to shift to his own house which is the house in question and his requirement were bonafide. He described the members of the family. He also alleged that he was owner of the premises and that the premises were let for residential purpose only.

(3.) NOW the last requirement of Section 14(1)(e) is regarding the alternative accommodation available with the respondent which the respondent has to show is not sufficient. In the petition as also in the evidence, the respondent has failed to disclose the extent of accommodation available with the respondent in the rented premises. The respondent was in the rented premises even when the premises in question were let to the petitioner. In these circumstances, it was incumbent on the respondent to allege and prove that the accommodation in the rented premises is sufficient. The question of proof would arise after allegation in the petition and I find that even the allegation is missing. The learned Additional Rent Controller has merely observed that the respondent wants to come in his own house and he is entitled to do so. I am afraid, this observation is uncalled for as by now the law is settled that the owner-landlord has to prove that the accommodation in his possession is insufficient and he bonafide requires the premises for which the petition has been filed. In these circumstances, the petition is allowed and the case is sent back to the Additional Rent Controller, who would give further opportunity to the parties on the question of bonafide requirement of the premises in question. The parties will be at liberty to lead evidence on the question of sufficiency or insufficiency of accommodation available with the respondent landlord. The parties are directed to appear before the Additional Rent Controller on 22.9.1987. The petition is disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs. Petition allowed.