Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SAURABH BANERJEE
Education Department – Appellant
Versus
MS Asiya Jamil – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SAURABH BANERJEE, J.
1. The respondent/ landlord, [hereinafter referred to as “landlord”] filed an Eviction Petition under Section 14 (1)(e) read with Section 25B of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958,[hereinafter referred to as “DRC Act”]before the learned Additional Rent Controller-01, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, [hereinafter referred to as “ARC”], seeking eviction of the petitioners/ tenant, [hereinafter referred to as “tenant”] from the first and second floor of the property bearing nos.2376 to 2382, situated in Municipal Ward No.VI, Ballimaran, Delhi, [hereinafter referred to as “subject premises”], on the ground of her bona fide requirement of the subject premises for her own residence.
2. Essentially, it was the case of the landlord that she is a single lady aged about 69 years, who is suffering from various age related diseases/ ailments and has no one to look after her at her present address at Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh. Additionally, as per landlord since she was born, educated and had spent substantial part of her life in Delhi, as also since all her near and close relatives reside there, she intends to return and reside in Delhi. Also, in the evict
The court affirmed the bona fide requirement of a landlord for personal residence, placing the onus on the tenant to establish any alternative accommodation's suitability, which was not proven.
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
