DARSHANA BHOLA & ORS. vs SMT. POONAM SAXENA

Judgment text excerpt

$~76 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 14.02.2025 + RC.REV. 157/2022 DARSHANA BHOLA & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Manu Sishodia and Ms. Hina Rajput, Advs. with Petitioner No. 3. versus SMT. POONAM SAXENA .....Respondent Through: Mr. Arun Kumar Sharma, Ms. Vandana Sharma, Mr. Varun Sharma, Ms. Yogita with Ms. Poonam, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU TARA VITASTA GANJU, J.: (Oral) CM Appl.25773/2024[Seeking vacation of stay] 1. This is an Application filed on behalf of the Respondent seeking vacation of stay. 2. A Coordinate Bench of this Court by its order dated 14.07.2022 had directed that the execution of the Impugned Order shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing. This position has continued as is, however no user and occupation charges are being paid by the Petitioners/tenants. 3. This Court by its order dated 03.02.2025 after examining the issues as raised in the present Petition had passed the following directions: “3. So far as concerns the landlord-tenant relationship and the ownership of the subject premises, the same are not under challenge. The only challenge as is raised by the Petitioners/tenants is that the rental for the subject premises is Rs.15,000/- per month and thus relying on the provisions of Section 3(c) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, it is contended that the same is not applicable to the facts of the present Petition and hence the Eviction Petition was not maintainable. 3.1 On the aspect of bona fide need, as is set out in the Eviction Petition, the same is for the residential requirement of the Respondent/landlord herself Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed RC.REV. 157/2022 Page 1 of 6 By:RAHUL Signing Date:15.02.2025 18:54:07 and her family. 3.2 On the aspect of availability