KRISHNA GUPTA Vs. VIPIN KUMAR & ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide the present petition, the petitioner assails the impugned order dated 09.03.2018 of the Court of the learned CCJ-cum-ARC-1 (Central), (Pilot Court), Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi in Eviction Petition No.673/2017/CIS 785/2017 whereby the eviction petition filed by the respondent nos. 1 & 2 to the present R.C. Rev. 472/2018 seeking eviction of the petitioner herein from the tenanted premises i.e. one hall admeasuring 14'8" x 9'0"and one room admeasuring 7'5" x 10'0"and passage admeasuring 3'6"(width) on the ground floor, House No.10433, Gali Pathshalawali, Manakpura, Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005, more specifically shown in red colour in the site plan annexed along with the petition on the ground of bona fide requirement under Section 14 (1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 as amended, was allowed, with it having been directed that the said order would not be executed for a period of six months from the date of the impugned order i.e. 09.03.2018 in terms of Section 14 (7) of the enactment.

(2.) Vide order dated 28.09.2018, the matter was directed to be renotified for the date 01.10.2018 inasmuch as no affidavit had been filed on the record by the petitioner to show that the bailiff had been appointed to take possession of the property. The petitioner thus on 29.09.2018 submitted her affidavit to the effect that vide order dated 19.09.2018 the bailiff had been appointed for taking possession of the property in question and the status report in compliance of the execution of the warrant is to be filed.

(3.) The respondents to the present petition are indicated to be the residents of one small room admeasuring 7'10"x 8'10" with kitchen on the first floor of the tenanted premises. The respondents claimed through their eviction petition that they were the sole and absolute owner/landlord of the tenanted premises let out to the petitioner herein about 20 years prior to institution of the eviction petition instituted on 29.08.2017, which tenanted premises was let out by the grand-father of the respondents i.e. Mr. Than Singh and had been let out for commercial purposes. The respondents herein through their eviction petition claimed that the tenanted premises were let out for commercial purposes at the rate of rent of Rs. 200/- p.m. excluding other charges which had been revised from time to time with the rate of rent being Rs. 1,000/- p.m. on the date when the eviction petition had been filed.