V.B.Gupta, J. By this common judgment, above two petitions filed under Section 25-B (8) of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (for short as „Act') are being disposed of.

2. Vide impugned order dated 30th January, 2010, Additional Rent Controller (for short as „Controller') Delhi, dismissed the applications for leave to contest along with affidavit filed by petitioners/tenants and eviction order was passed in favour of respondent/landlord.

3. Brief facts are that, shops in question situated on the ground floor of property No. C-45, Nehru Road, Adarsh Nagar, Delhi, were let out to the petitioners by respondent for non-residential purposes, of which respondent is the owner.

4. It has been alleged by respondent that earlier suit property was owned by Sh. Purshottam Dass Sawhney and Smt. Bhojwanti Sawhney, grandparents of the respondent. After death of Sh. Purshottam Dass Sawhney, his wife Smt. Bhojwanti Sawhney became the sole owner and landlady of the demised premises. However, on 20/1/2007, unfortunately she also expired and left behind registered will bequeathing the demised suit shops in favour of the respondent. Thus, respondent has become the absolute owner and landlord of the demised shops as he has stepped into the shoes of Smt. Bhojwanti Sawhney.

5. Respondent is living with his family on the first floor of property bearing No. C-45, Adarsh Nagar, Delhi, which consists of three bedrooms, drawing-cum-dining, kitchen, bathroom/WC. On second floor, there is Pooja Room. Respondent's family consists of himself, his father, mother and a younger sister. His father is an Engineer and is now leading a retired life. Respondent's father and mother are totally dependent on him financially and also for the purpose of residence.

6. Respondent as well as his younger sister are of marriageable age. Respondent is getting married in the month of June, 2009. Thereafter, he would ever require more space for himself and his wife. His younger sister is planning to get married in the near future. However, due to paucity of accommodation, marriage of respondent and his younger sister is being delayed.

7. Father of respondent is 69 years old and is suffering from various serious ailments. In 2007, respondent's father was operated for left knee replacement and since then has been unable to walk freely. On 17.2.2008 his father suffered paralytic stroke. He was admitted in Max Super Speciality Hospital, Saket, New Delhi and remained in the hospital for almost ten days. During his hospital stay, he was also detected to be suffering from “Tubercular Synovities” of right knee. Since then he is completely confined to bed and is totally invalid. He requires round the clock care. Due to this paralytic stroke, his speech has also suffered. He has developed severe contracture in both his right and left leg. Due to the contracture, he is unable to straighten his legs and hence cannot walk. To remove the contracture and to relax the muscles, on the suggestion of the Neurologist, Dr. J.D.Mukherji, Botox injections have been administered to his father. For Botox treatment to bear fruit, it is mandatory that respondent's father is taken for physiotherapy, which is virtually impossible as he cannot bear his weight alone and cannot be carried downstairs. Respondent is the sole male member in his family. If respondent's father is not taken for physiotherapy, the contracture in his legs will become permanent and then his condition will become incurable.

8. Father of respondent had to be admitted in hospital in March 2008 and in February, 2009 as he has suffered from chest pain and Seizure disorder. Condition of his father is really critical and doctors have advised him that he has to be taken to the hospital immediately, if he suffers from any further seizures, without loss of time. Respondent being working and his mother single handedly takes care of his father and she is alone at home. Since respondent's father is totally invalid and in ca