SHARIFUDDIN Vs. MEHRUN NISA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Petition under Section 25b of the Delhi Rent Control Act (the Act) has been filed by the petitioner landlord to impugn the order passed by the learned additional Rent Controller Delhi in eviction Petition No. E-96/2000 dated 18. 10. 2001 whereby the eviction Petition filed by the petitioner landlord on the ground of bonafide requirement under Section 14 (1) (e) of the Act has been dismissed. The Petition has been dismissed primarily on two grounds. The first is that the petitioner had failed to establish that the purpose of letting was only residential and the second that the petitioner himself has not appeared as witness and the evidence has been led on behalf of petitioner through his son and General Attorney Shri Zulfikar Ahmed.

(2.) THE case of the Respondent tenant was that the Respondents were heirs of the late Ahsan Ali, who had taken on rent the premises situated on First Floor of the property No. 6360, Ward No. 14, Gali Babu Bashat, Kasabpura, Sadar Bazar, delhi in the year 1965 from the erstwhile owner. The property was subsequently purchased by the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner Late Shri Shamsuddin. So far as the ownership and the relationship between the parties is concerned, the learned Additional Rent Controller gave a finding in favour of the petitioner that the petitioner was the owner and the landlord of the suit property of which the respondent was the tenant.

(3.) ON the aspect of the purpose of letting, the petitioner landlord had relied upon the counter foil of three rent receipts and counterfoils which had been proved on record as Ex. AW-1/6 to AW-1/8. Pertinently, these very receipts/counterfoils were proved on record by Respondent as well, as "rw-2/p1 to RW-2/p3. These counter foils are in Urdu language. The learned Rent controller has understood the purpose of letting as recorded therein as "upper house". Learned Counsel for the Petitioner argued that in two of these receipts, namely RW-2/p1 and RW-2/p2, the purpose of letting is stated to be "balai makan" and in RW-2/p3 the same is mentioned as "balai khana". Mr. R. P. Bansal, Senior advocate, who happened to be present in court in relation to another regular matter at Srl. No. 4 was called upon by the court to assist the court in reading and understanding the said exhibits, which are in Urdu language. He has confirmed that the user recorded in the aforesaid exhibits is as aforesaid.