Y RAJESHWARI Vs. BOMBAY TYRES INTERNATIONAL LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-landlady has filed the present petition seeking review of my judgment dated November 8, 1988, by which I had dismissed the civil revision brought under Section 25-B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act and had affirmed the order of the Rent Controller by which she had dismissed the eviction petition brought by the petitioner on the ground of eviction covered by clause (?) of subsection (1) of Section 14 of the Delhi Rent Control Act.

(2.) I have held in my judgment that the petitioner did net bonafide require the demised premises for occupation as resi- dence for herself inasmuch she had been actuated by a desire to increase the rent of the demised premises. Once a finding is given that the requiremeat of the premises by the petitioner is not bonafide, the petitioner obviously could net get the eviction of the tenant on the ground covered by clause (e). In the review petition it has been mentioned that the Delhi Rent Control Act has been since amended and Section 14-D has been inserted by which a right has been conferred on a widow to obtain the premises let out by her if the same are required by her for her own residence. This amendment appears to have come into force subsequent to the judgment delivered by me.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has, however, contended that in order to mould the relief the subsequent events could always be taken note of. It is, no doubt, a settled principle of law that subsequent events could be taken note of in order to decide whether a particular ground of eviction already set out stands proved or not but those subsequent events which could be taken note of by the court must have happened before the final disposal of the case upto the appellate stage. No case has been brough. to my notice by the learned counsel for the petitioner where a subsequent event regarding a change in legislation could be taken note of in a review petition for deciding whether the judgment already delivered requires to be reviewed or not. Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure reads as follows-