SUBHASH CHANDER GUPTA Vs. VASUDEV KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is aggrieved by an order of learned Additional Rent controller dated 6th November 2004 whereby a petition under Section 14 (1) (e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act in respect of a premises bearing No. 159, AGCR enclave, Delhi filed by the petitioner was dismissed after contest.

(2.) THE relationship of landlord and tenant is not in dispute; ownership of the premises and the letting purposes are also not in dispute. The petitioner had sought the premises for his bonafide requirement alleging therein that he was living on the first floor of the premises in question and required ground floor in occupation of tenant for himself and his family members. The accommodation in his occupation consisted of 3 rooms, one drawing room on the first floor. . His family included his wife, his daughter Vijeta Kanwar and son-in-law Mr. Himanshu. His daughter got married on 17th February 2002 and after marriage she along with her husband had been living with him.

(3.) THE landlord claimed to be a man of status. He was author of several books and also used to deliver lectures and discourses. He was a Reiki Expert and also used to entertain patients for treatment by Reiki method. He needed a study room for his writing work and also needed a room for yoga and Reiki classes. He needed a guest room since his daughter got married and more relatives of his daughter and his relatives started visiting him frequently. His daughter and son-in-law both were highly educated and working and each maintaining a car. He needed open space on the ground floor for parking of cars. His family also needed a Pooja Ghar. His daughter and son-in-law needed one bedroom and he and his wife needed one bedroom and a drawing room. Hence, the accommodation available with him i. e. three rooms was highly insufficient. The tenant claimed that requirement of landlord"s daughter could not be considered as bonafide requirement. He also denied other requirement of landlord.