RAMESH WATI Vs. HAR NARAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition was preferred to bring a challenge to the judgment dated 12.07.2015 of the Additional Rent Controller (ARC) whereby the eviction petition (E-82/2003) instituted on 04.03.2003 by the petitioners seeking an order of eviction on the ground of bonafide need in terms of Section 14 (1)(e) of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 in respect of the premises described as one room measuring 15.6 x 13' alongwith veranda store measuring 6' x 7', open courtyard measuring 7.8 x 9.8, bathroom measuring 6' x 3' and a common latrine, as shown in colour red in site plan (Ex. PW1/1) forming part of house no.4537- 38, Arya Pura, Subzi Mandi, Delhi-110 007 (hereinafter referred to as "the tenanted premises") was dismissed.

(2.) The eviction case, as originally brought before the ARC by Smt. Ramesh Wati and Leelawati both concededly co-landlords vis-a-vis the respondent in respect of the tenanted premises, they being residents of house no.4550, Arya Pura, Subzi Mandi, Delhi-110 007, a property distinct from the property of which the tenanted premises forms a part. Smt. Leelawati, second petitioner died during the pendency of the case before the Rent Controller and stood substituted by her husband, Bijender Kumar, who alongwith the first petitioner prosecuted the case till the impugned judgment dated 12.07.2005 was passed. It may be added here that the first petitioner Smt. Rameshwati also died (on 30.07.2015) during the pendency of the revision petition before this court and on application (CM 24562/2015) being moved, she has been substituted by her legal heirs, they including her husband Bal Kishan Verma, two sons Ajay Kumar Verma and Vijay Kumar Verma and two daughters Neelam and Madhu Tanwar.

(3.) As per the averments before the Rent Controller, at the time of filing of the eviction petition, the family of the first petitioner comprised of nine members including herself, her husband, elder son Ajay Kumar, his wife Indu Verma, their children Apurva Verma and Anushka Verma, younger son Vijay Kumar (who was unmarried at that point of time), then a student of post-graduation and two daughters both studying one pursuing graduation, the other still in school. It was pleaded that the first petitioner was suffering from heart ailment and hyper-tension and had been advised medically against climbing stairs for which reason she was in need of accommodation at the ground floor level. It was explained that the property no.4537-38, of which the tenanted portion forms a part, consists of 6 rooms on the ground floor, 5 on the first floor and 2 barsatis on the second floor, each portion in occupation of different tenants. The petitioners also own property no.4550, Arya Pura, Subzi Mandi, Delhi-11 007, the first floor portion thereof comprising of two rooms, kothri, kitchen, latrine and bath were in use and at the disposal of the first petitioner, ground floor and a kothri measuring 8' x 8' at the second floor being in use and occupation of the second petitioner. It was explained that the second petitioner was also suffering from high blood pressure and liver disease and, therefore, required the continued use of the ground floor portion which consequently could not be made available for purposes of the first petitioner. The prayer was for eviction of the respondent on the ground of bonafide need of the first petitioner since the ground floor portion of house no.4550 which comprised primarily of two rooms and kothri was insufficient for the needs of the large family, it requiring one room for the first petitioner and her husband, one room for the elder married son and one room each for the three other children besides accommodation required in the nature of drawing room and guest room.