VINOD KAPOOR Vs. KAILASH SETHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIDE order dated 9. 5. 2008 learned ARC allowed the eviction petition filed by respondent under section 14 D of the Delhi Rent Control Act dismissing the application of the respondent for leave to defend. The petitioner is aggrieved by the said order and has preferred this revision on the ground that the requirement of the widow land-lady was not a bona fide requirement.

(2.) THE petitioner's grievance is that the ARC failed to appreciate the plausible defence raised by the petitioner in his application for leave to defend and wrongly refused the permission to contest the eviction petition. The accommodation available with the respondent was sufficient for herself and her family members. She had not shown correct accommodation with her and the learned ARC wrongly disbelieved the contention of the petitioner. In his application for leave to defend the petitioner had stated that the respondent was having 10 rooms available for use in her occupation.

(3.) THE property in question was let out to the petitioner by the deceased husband of respondent about 28 years prior to filing of the eviction petition. It is not disputed that the petitioner had become widow and she filed the petition under section 14 D after having become the widow. The extent of family of the landlord was not disputed.