OM PRAKASH vs DEVKI NANDAN BAJAJ

Judgment text excerpt

* I N T H E H I G H CO U RT O F DE L H I AT NE W DE L H I Reserved on: November 21, 2025 % Pronounced on: December 19, 2025 + RC.REV. 395/2024 OM PRAKASH .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Sumit Gaba, Adv. Versus DEVKI NANDAN BAJAJ .....Respondent Through: Mr. Amit Saxena, Mr. Santosh Kr. Sharma, Mr. Mridul Sharma, Ms. Shalini Mishra and Mr. Vasu Singhal, Advs. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner/ landlord1 filed an Eviction petition being RC/ ARC 60 of 2019 against the respondent/ tenant2 qua shop no.3 situated in plot No.166, Shyama Prasad Mukherjee Park, Tilak Nagar, New Delhi-110 0183 under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 19584, before the learned Additional Rent Controller, West District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi5. 2. Succinctly put, the landlord, father of a married daughter and two unmarried daughters, in his Eviction Petition sought eviction of the tenant 1 Hereinafter “landlord” 2 Hereinafter “tenant” 3 Hereinafter “subject premises” 4 Hereinafter “DRC Act” 5 Hereinafter “learned ARC” RC.REV. 395/2024 Page 1 of 9 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:BABLOO SHAH Signing Date:19.12.2025 16:14:38 from the subject premises from a property comprising of six shop(s), of which shop nos.4 and 5 were lying vacant and shop nos.1, 2 and 6 were occupied by third parties. As per landlord, he had kept shop nos.4 and 5 aside for his two unmarried daughters, who were to start their respective professions/ businesses therefrom. There was a bona fide requirement of the subject premises by him, as he was a retired senior citizen who intended to commence a strain-less business of grocery/ confectionery outlet from there as it was the largest shop, and as he had no other suitable alternative accommodation available with him. He als