Precision Steel – Appellant
Versus
Prem Deva Niranjan Deva Tayal – Respondent
JUDGMENT
R.C. Lahoti, J.-Proceedings for eviction of the appellants-tenants, were initiated by the respondent-landlord on the ground available under clause (e) of sub-section (1) of Section 14 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter the Act , for short). The High Court has, in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction, passed an order for recovery of possession of the tenancy premises. The tenants are in appeal by special leave.
2. The tenancy premises are situated at B-44, Greater Kailash, Part I, New Delhi. Out of the building standing over 1000 sq. yards plot the appellants are in occupation of the front portion of the ground-floor since 1971. Premises comprise of four bed-rooms, 3 bathrooms, 1 barsati, 1 garage and the servant quarters along with one bathroom for servants. At this stage, it is no more in controversy that the respondent is owner-cum-landlord of the premises and the appellants are the tenants. The terms of tenancy are incorporated in a document dated 13th September, 1971 called Licence Deed. The Rent Controller and the High Court have both recorded findings of fact that the suit premises are required bona fide by the respondent-landlord for occupation as a
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.