CRP No.207/2004

Page 1 of 11

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

+

C.R.P. 207/2004

SHAMBHOO SINGH VERMA

..... Petitioner

Through:

Mr.V.K.Sharma, Adv.

versus

TRILOKI NATH SHARMA

..... Respondent

Through:

Ms.Kusum Lata Sharma, Adv.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR

INDERMEET KAUR, J. (Oral)

1

Order impugned is the order dated 12.01.2004; the eviction

petition filed by Triloki Nath Sharma (hereinafter referred to as the ‘

landlord’) seeking eviction of his tenant Shambhoo Singh Verma

(hereinafter referred to as the ‘tenant’) under Section 14 (1)(e) of the

Delhi Rent Control Act (DRCA) had been decreed.

2

Record shows that the present eviction petition has been filed by

the landlord on the ground of bonafide requirement. Premises comprise

of one room and dalan in front of premises No.9961/XVI, Ram Behari

Road, Sarai Rohilla, Delhi; contention was that the premises had been

let out to the tenant for a residential purpose; there was no written

2012:DHC:3643

CRP No.207/2004

Page 2 of 11

agreement; tenancy was oral; the petitioner now requires the premises

bonafide for his own residence; his family consists of himself, his wife,

his three sons ages 48 years, 42 years and 38 years; elder son is also

married and has three children; the second son is also married with two

children and the third son is also married and has two daughters. The

petitioner also has three daughters all of whom are married. The

accommodation presently available with the petitioner is in the same

property i.e. property bearing No. 9954/A, street No. 5, Sarai Rohilla,

Delhi which comprises of three rooms, one kitchen, one bathroom and

one store room out of which one room is in occupation of his youngest

son Raj Kumar Sharma and his family; these premises are required by

the petitioner for the residence of his eldest son who has a family of

three children aged 20 years, 15 years and 10 years; the petitioner is the

owner of properties bearing No. 9954 to 9956/XVI and 9961 to

9965/XLI, Ram Behari Road, Sarai Rohilla, Delhi; this was by virtue of

a Will; all the aforenoted properties are occupied by different tenants

except property bearing No. 9954/A in which the petitioner is residing

with his family members who are dependent upon him. Accommodation

presently available with the petitioner is highly insufficient. The

2012:DHC:3643

CRP No.207/2004

Page 3 of 11

petitioner’s three married daughters along with their husbands and

children often visit him; he cannot entertain his relatives and guests; he

also has no separate pooja room; for all the aforenoted reasons, the

eviction petition was filed.

3

Leave to defend had been granted to the tenant. Written statement

was filed. Relationship of landlord-tenant was disputed; it was denied

that the landlord is the owner of the disputed premises; contention was

that the Will purported to have been executed in favour of the petitioner

is not a valid document; the property belongs to Mahant Budha Dass

who is the owner of the said premises; there being no relationship of

landlord-tenant, present eviction petition is liable to be dismissed.

Further contention was that the bonafide requirement of the landlord has

not been depicted and for all the aforenoted reason, the eviction petition

is liable to be dismissed.

4

Oral and documentary evidence was led.

5

PW-1 was the landlady Kusum Lata Sharma; she was the legal

representative of deceased Triloki Nath Sharma who had been brought

on record; she was his daughter; she has proved the Will Ex. PW-1/A by

virtue of which her father had become the owner of the suit property;

2012:DHC:3643

CRP No.207/2004

Page 4 of 11

mutation letter whereby the property had been mutated in the name of

her father Triloki Nath Sharma was proved as Ex. PW-1/B; house tax

receipts were proved as Ex. PW-1/C to Ex. PW-1/D; she had