Back
JASMEET SINGH
Praveen – Appellant
Versus
Mulak Raj – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Jasmeet Singh, J. - This is a petition seeking setting aside of the order dated 10.03.2016 in E.No. 1098/14/11 passed by the learned ARC (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi titled as "Sh. Mulak Raj and others v. Sh. Bishambar Dayal & Sons and Anr" whereby the application of the petitioners for leave to defend was dismissed and the petition filed by the respondents under section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as "DRC Act") was allowed.
2. The petitioners are the tenants and the respondents are the landlords of Property No. 1226, 1st Floor, Kacha Bagh, Chandni Chowk, Delhi-110006 (hereinafter referred to as "tenanted premises").
3. Respondent no.1 (Mr. Mulak Raj) is the son of Late Mr. Panna Lal. Respondent no.2 (Mr. Deepak Kumar), respondent no.3 (Mr. Mukesh Kumar) and respondent no.4 (Mr. Sunil Kumar Kamboj) are the sons of respondent no.1.
4. Mr. Amit Kamboj and Mr. Rohit Kamboj are the sons of respondent no.2; Mr. Gaurav Kamboj and Mr. Himanshu Kamboj are the sons of respondent no.3; Mr. Uday Kamboj and Mr. Akshay Kamboj are the sons of respondent no.4.
BRIEF FACTS GIVING RISE TO THE PRESENT PETITION
5. The tenanted premises was purchased by on
The court recognized the landlord's prerogative to determine their specific requirements and refrained from imposing directives on the landlord regarding the nature or quality of their chosen usage o....
The landlord's bonafide need for the tenanted premises, the landlord's subjective choice in selecting suitable accommodation, and the limited scope of the court's revisional jurisdiction were the cen....
Landlords can seek tenant eviction based on bona fide need, despite owning other properties nearby, provided alternatives do not meet their specific business requirements.
The need of the landlords for the tenanted premises for providing commercial accommodation to their adult sons for starting independent business is genuine and the finding of the Trial Court does not....
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 re....
The Court emphasized the objective of speedy possession for landlords under Section 14(1)(e) of the DRC Act and found that the tenant's prolonged proceedings and subsequent review petition were an ab....
The Court emphasized the objective of speedy possession under Section 14(1)(e) of the DRC Act and held that the legal heirs' actions prolonged the possession, negating the objective. The legal heirs ....
Bona fide requirement of land lord - Landlord is the best Judge of his requirement and Courts have no concern to dictate to the landlord as to how and in what manner he should live.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
