M.L. MEHTA, J.

1. The present revision petition is filed under Sec. 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, against the Order passed by Ld. ARC, Central District, Delhi dated 05.09.2012 in Eviction Petition No. E-70/2010 dismissing the application for leave to defend. The brief facts giving rise to this petition are as follows.

2. The respondent herein filed an eviction petition on the ground of bona fide requirement, stating that she is the owner of the property bearing no. 3987/88, Kaseru Walan, Pahar Ganj, New Delhi, by virtue of the sale deed dated 01.04.1994 as she purchased the same from its pervious owner Smt. Maya Devi Jain. The suit shop is situated on the ground floor and forming part of the property bearing No. 2987/88, Kaseru Walan, Pahar Ganj, New Delhi is shown in red in the site plan placed on record before the Ld. ARC. The suit shop was let-out to the petitioner herein for non-residential purpose by the erstwhile owner.

3. In the eviction petition, the respondent submitted that she bona fide requires the shop to settle her son Vipul Gupta and that she has no other reasonably suitable accommodation available to her. She also submitted that the shop in question was lying locked since the beginning and that the electricity connection also stands disconnected on account of closure of premises. The rent of the shop was Rs. 33/- per month excluding other charges, which was paid by the petitioner to the respondent upto 31.03.2004, after which it was alleged that no rent was paid.

4. In the leave to defend application, the petitioner herein stated that the respondent may be put to strict proof of the ownership of the suit shop. He also submitted that the rate of rent was Rs. 35/- per month and he has been paying it regularly. It was also alleged that various property dealers have approached and asked him to vacate the suit shop as the respondent intended to dispose the entire building. He has also alleged the respondent to be owning various properties as given under:

a. Property No. 3987 (first, second and third floor), Kaseru Walan, Pahar Ganj, Delhi – 110055, which is situated above the suit shop and has been let out to M/s. Hotel Orient Palace Dlx.

b. Property No. 3984, 3985 and 3986, which is adjoining the demised shop, consisting of (ground, first, second and third floor), and also property no. 451, 452 & 453, at Kaseru Walan, Pahar Ganj, Delhi -110055, which are also let out to M/s. Hotel Orient Palace Dlx. and Hotel Crown Plaza respectively.

c. Shop. No. 2440, Gali No. 10, Beadon Pura, Karol Bagh, New Delhi, which is being run by the respondent and her family members in the name of M/s. Apsara Silk Emporium.

d. Shop No. 5/30, WEA Ajmal Khan Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi, from where the respondent and her family members are carrying on their business of whole seller of designer sarees, dupattas and lenghas by the name of M/s. Apsara Creations.

e. Shop No. 15-A/23, WEA Ajmal Khan Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi, Opp. Titan Watch Co. from where the husband of the respondent and her son Sh. Vipul Gupta are doing business of special designer sarees, suits, duapattas and lenghas by the name of M/s. Apsara Silk Emporium.

f. Property no. 5/30, WEA Saraswati Marg, Karol Bagh, New Delhi from whereby the respondent and her family members are running a hotel by the name of Baba Continental.

g. Property no. 104, Vivekanad Puri, Sarai Rohilla, Delhi, owned by the respondent and her family members, which is located in the locality having mixed land use and from where also the respondent and her family can run any business.

5. The petitioner placed on record, photographs of the properties as well as business cards and even a photograph of the respondent’s son sitting in one of the aforementioned shops. The petitioner also contended that the respondent has not stated what kind of business she intends to start for her son from the suit premises. He submitted that respondent’s son is already devoting full time in the business of S