ANIL INDUSTRY Vs. RAM SARUP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) EVEN through there may be some scope for interference in the findings recorded by Rent Controller and Appellate Authority despite the same being concurrent with regard to issue pertaining to bonafide requirement of the landlord but there seems to be scope for interference insofar as findings with regard to change of user of the demised premises, which, as per the findings, was let out for residential purposes, has been converted into commercial premises are concerned. For arriving at the findings aforesaid, Rent Controller and Appellate Authority have relied upon voluminous evidence inclusive of documentary evidence.

(2.) AT this stage, counsel requests that inasmuch as the petitioners are carrying on business activities in the premises in dispute, in the very nature of things it will take time to find alternative accommodation and, therefore, the petitioners may be given some time to vacate the demised premises and further that the petitioners are ready to give an undertaking that they shall vacate the premises in dispute and hand over vacant possession thereof to the respondents immediately after the expiry of time that may be granted by this Court.