The Court emphasized the presumption of bona fide need in favor of the Landlord under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, and the restrictive scope of interference by the High Court in revisional jurisdiction.

JUDGMENT

Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, J.

CAV. 78/2023

Learned counsel for the Respondent has entered appearance and addressed arguments.

Accordingly, the Caveat stands discharged.

RC.REV. 36/2023, & CM APPL. 6147/2023

1. The present revision petition has been filed by the Petitioner (`Tenant'), assailing the order dated 19.09.2022 passed by the Senior Civil Judge acting as Rent Controller, Shahdara District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi (`Trial Court'), in RC ARC No. 224/19, whereby the Petitioner's application seeking leave to defend has been dismissed; and an eviction order has been passed in favour of the Respondent (`Landlord') qua shop on the ground floor of property bearing no. 236 E, Shukla Market, Anaj Mandi, Shahdara, Delhi-32, admeasuring 444.31 sq. feet approx. (`tenanted premises').

2. The Landlord filed an eviction petition under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (`DRC Act'), on the ground of bona fide requirement for himself as well as his only son. The eviction petition was filed on 15.05.2019 stating that the Landlord, who was then employed with the Punjab National Bank was scheduled to superannuate on 31.03.2020; and the tenanted premises were required for continuing the employment of Landlord, who wishes to run a departmental store. In addition, it was stated that the only son of the Landlord had also completed his MBA and he as well requires the tenanted premises for running and operating a business.

2.1. It was stated that the Landlord requires the tenanted premises for starting his independent business of a departmental store for selling grocery, which would require 350-450 sq. ft. area for the purpose of displaying and stocking of goods.

2.2. It was stated that the tenanted premises is located in the property bearing No. 235-238, Shukla Market, Anaj Mandi, Shahdara, Delhi-110032 (`Property No. 235-238'). It was stated that there are fourteen (14) shops in the Property on the ground floor, which are marked as Point `A' to `N' in the site plan. It is stated that the tenanted premises is marked in red colour in the site plan, which is being reproduced hereinunder for ease of reference:

[IMG]

2.3. It is stated that the Property No. 235-238 was owned by the parents of the Respondent and the title has devolved upon the Respondent upon their demise. It is stated that except four (4) shops marked as Point K, L, M and N on the site plan, the remaining ten (10) shops stand sold. The date of sale of the said ten (10) shops has been duly disclosed in the eviction petition.

2.4. With respect to shops marked as Point K, L and M, it has been stated that the said shops are in occupation of old tenants, who have statutory protection under the DRC Act. With respect to shop marked as Point N, it has been stated that the said shop, ad-measuring 64.583 sq. ft., was let out on 06.12.2018 vide a registered agreement. It has been stated in the eviction petition that the said area of 64.583 sq. ft. is not suitable for the requirement of the Landlord, who requires an area of 350-450 sq. ft.

2.5. The Landlord has also disclosed that he owns a property bearing No. 3/34, Gali Shuklan, Chotta Bazar, Shahdara, Delhi-110032 (`Property No. 3/34'). It is stated in the eviction petition that the said property is the residence of the Landlord's family and has been the residence of his ancestors as well. It is stated that in the said property there is one shop on the ground floor, which is occupied by an old statutory tenant since the year 1988. It is stated that except for the said one shop, the entire property No. 3/34 is residential in nature and is not suitable for commercial activity.

3. The Tenant had filed his application for leave to defend on 04.06.2019 and raised a plea disputing the ownership of the Respondent, Landlord. The said plea was however abandoned and, in fact, the Tenant categorically admits that the tenanted premises have devolved upon the Respondent, Landlord herein. The Tenant admits that the