DEVINDER GUPTA Vs. SAVITRI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The tenant is in revision against the order of eviction dated 20.7.2017, passed by the Rent Controller, Faridabad, as also the judgment dated 4.10.2019, vide which his ejectment from the demised premises has since been affirmed. Parties to the lis, hereinafter, shall be referred to as landlord and tenant.

(2.) In brief, the case set out by the landlord was that demised premises was a shop measuring 11'x35', which formed part of plot No. 2A/1A, BP, NIT, Faridabad. Husband of the landlord, namely Amar Nath Bhatia, who expired on 15.1.1991, had let out the shop in question about 35-40 years ago. However, the tenant was liable to be evicted, for he had failed to pay rent w.e.f.1.4.2014 to 31.3.2015 @ Rs. 520/- per month, i.e. total amounting to Rs. 6,240/- plus house tax @ 10%. The other two grounds upon which the eviction of the tenant was sought: the landlord required the demised premises for her personal necessity, and as the tenant had even ceased to occupy the premises, which was lying closed for the last 3 years.

(3.) In the written statement filed by the tenant, he admitted the relationship between the parties. However, it was submitted that he had paid rent for the period: 1.4.2014 to 31.3.2015, vide a cheque for Rs. 6240/-drawn on OBC, NIT, Faridabad, which was encashed by the landlord on 20.5.2014. Further, the landlord was an old lady of 80 years, and she owned several other commercial properties in Faridabad. For she was getting income of more than Rs.20 lakhs from her properties, the plea that she required the premises for her personal bonafide necessity was misconceived. Tenant was carrying out his business as usual under the name and style: 'M/S G.C. Electric Store' in the shop in question for the past 40 years and has regularly been filing his sales tax returns. Thus, the eviction petition was liable to be dismissed.