Important Point – High court is to test order of ARC to see whether it is according to law and whether conclusions are not wholly unreasonable.

Jayant Nath, J.

1. The present revision petition is filed under Section 25-B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the DRC Act) seeking to impugn the order dated 29.01.2013 passed by the Additional Rent Controller (hereinafter referred to as the ARC) whereby the application for grant of leave to defend filed by the petitioner was dismissed and an eviction order was passed under Section 14(1)(e) of the DRC Act.

2. The brief facts are that respondent No. 1/landlord filed an eviction petition against the petitioner and Sh. Roshan Lal, now represented by his LRs being petitioners No. 2 and 3, respondents No.2(a) to 2(c) and Sh. Raj Kishan Jain, son of Sh. Roshan Lal. The eviction petition was filed for eviction of Shop No. 1427, Bazar Chitli Qabar, Jama Masjid, Delhi-110006. As per the petition, late Sh. Roshan Lal and Sh. Raj Kishan were under joint tenancy but had allowed the petitioner No.1 to carry on business on the false pretext of partnership. It was averred in the eviction petition that respondent No.1 is the owner and landlord vide sale deed dated 27.02.1989 and release deed dated 29.07.1999. It was urged that the shop is required bona fidely by respondent No. 1 for his own use as well as for his family members. Respondent No. 1 is aged about 60 years having a cloth’s business in Shop No. 1430, first floor, Bazar Chitli Qabar, Zama Masjid Delhi under the name and style of “Mehtab Bhai Zari Wala” for earning his livelihood. Respondent No. 1 has no other commercial business to earn his livelihood. The respondent No. 1is having two sons, namely, Tariq Mehtab and Siraj Mehtab aged about 25 years and 22 years respectively and one daughter aged 20 years. It is further stated that two brothers of respondent No. 1 have passed away. One of his brothers, namely, Mehfooz Khan had died at a very young age leaving behind his wife, one daughter and one son aged about 22 years and 20 years respectively. The other brother, namely, Sultan Khan died on 14.06.2007 leaving behind three children. It was urged that the family of the two brothers and his own family depend on respondent No.1 and the tenanted shop is required bona fidely for the sons of respondent No.1 and for the son of his brother, namely, Late Mehfooz Khan.

3. The ARC by the impugned order noted the plea of the petitioner that respondent No.1 is neither the owner nor the landlord of the premises. It was noted that the suit property was owned by Hazi Zahiruddin and his brother Qamuddin. They had sold the property by a sale deed to respondent No.1 and to Smt. Rabia Arif who has relinquished her share in favour of the respondent No.1. It was admitted that the original tenants were inducted by Sh. Hazi Zahiruddin who had sold the shop to respondent No.1. Hence, the impugned order concludes that the relationship of landlord and tenant is evident.

4. On the issue of alternative accommodation, the impugned order noted the plea of the petitioner about the alleged alternative accommodation being available to respondent No.1, namely, premises No. 1426 and 1429, Bazar Chitli Qabar, Jama Masjid, Delhi, first, second and third floor of the building where the tenanted property is located, premises No. 1431-1435 of the same locality comprising of ground floor, first floor, second floor and third floor and property No. 1668, Gali Takhtwali Suiwalan, Daryaganj, Delhi. The impugned order noted that respondent No.1 has categorically explained that shop No. 1426 and 1429 are not owned by him. The said shops are owned by Sh. Arif Hussain Khan. Regarding shops in property No. 1431-1435, the impugned order noted that the said properties are not owned by respondent No.1. Respondent No. 1 has given the names of the owners of the said properties. It was also noted that it has been explained by respondent No.1 that the first floor of shop No. 1431 and 1432 and first floor of shop No. 1426-1429 is one hall in which respondent No.1 is running his business of cloth under