RAJINDAR SACHAR
HARBHAJAN DAS – Appellant
Versus
TILAK RAJ MEHTA – Respondent
( 1 ) THIS is a revision by the landlord against the order of the Additional Rent Controller, who by his order dated 26. 4. 1978 dismissed the application for eviction brought under Section 14 (1) (e) read with Chapter III of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter to be called the Act ).
( 2 ) THE admitted facts are that the family of the petitioner consists of himself, his wife and a son about 7/8 years old. The petitioner is Accounts Officer and is drawing total emoluments of about Rs. 1700. 00 per month. On the ground floor of the house there are two sets of two rooms each, being independent units. The respondent is a tenant in one of these sets namely- flat No. 2. The accommodation with the respondent/tenant is shown in red in plan Ex. A-2. The petitioner was previously posted at Kanpur and was transferred to Delhi sometime in February, 1977. The (petitioner filed application for eviction in May, 1977 on the ground that he required all the four fooms for his bonafide use/ it was also alleged that one of the tenants, Bhardwaj who was occupying one set had promised to vacate the premises but as the respondent had refused to vacate the premises the eviction petitio
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.