GHANSHYAM DASS Vs. SHAKUNTLA BAKSHI
LAWS(DLH)-2013-10-349
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Decided on October 28,2013

GHANSHYAM DASS Appellant
VERSUS
Shakuntla Bakshi Respondents




JUDGEMENT

MANMOHAN SINGH, J. - (1.)THE petitioner (respondent No.2 in the eviction petition) has filed the abovementioned revision petition under Section 25 -B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (in short, called the "DRC Act") against the order dated 28th February, 2012 passed by the learned Rent Controller (South), Saket Courts, Delhi in Eviction Petition bearing No.E -216/09 whereby the eviction order was passed against the petitioner and respondents No.2 to 6 herein by dismissing the application for leave to contest in favour of respondent No.1, directing the petitioner and respondents No.2 to 6 to vacate the ground floor, South -East portion forming part of property bearing No.18/1, Mehrauli, New Delhi, shown in red colour in site plan (hereinafter referred to as the "Suit Premises").
(2.)BRIEF facts are that the respondent No.1 filed an eviction petition under Section 14(1)(e) read with Section 25 -B of the DRC Act against the petitioner and respondents No.2 to 6 on the ground of bonafide requirement. The respondent No.1 is the owner/landlady of the property bearing No.18/1 which is a two storeyed house. The petitioner and respondents No.2 to 6 are the tenants in the suit premises. The said property was originally purchased by Sh.Ram Dayal in public auction from competent Officer, Rehabilitation Department, Jaisalmer House, New Delhi on 21st March, 1958. The certificate of sale was issued on 4th November, 1963. Said Sh.Ram Dayal sold vertical half portion of the said two -storeyed house consisting of ground and first floor to the husband of respondent No.1, Late Sh.J.N.Bakshi vide agreement to sell and other sale documents.
The suit premises was let out to Mr.Ram Kumar, father of the petitioner and respondents No.3 to 6. The rate of rent of the suit premises was Rs.7.50/ - per month. The case of the respondent No.1 was that the tenants have not paid the rent for the last 20 years.

(3.)SH .J.N.Bakshi expired on 4th April, 2003 and after the demise of Sh.J.N.Bakshi, the aforesaid property was mutated in the name of the respondent No.1, as other legal heirs of Sh.J.N.Bakshi relinquished their respective shares in the property in the name of the respondent No.1 vide registered Relinquishment Deed dated 20 th August, 2004. Presently, the respondent No.1 is aged about 76 years and is residing on the first floor of the aforesaid property along with her family. The first floor comprises of two bed rooms, one drawing room, one bathroom and one WC toilet, two kitchens, one verandah and balcony. The second floor is having one small asbestos temporary shed which is being used as store room.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.