SMT RAJ KUMARI BANSAL & ANR. vs SH GURCHARAN SINGH OTHERS

Judgment text excerpt

$~16 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 19.02.2025 + RC.REV. 63/2021 & CM Appls.10953/2021 and 9873/2024 SMT RAJ KUMARI BANSAL & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Rajat Aneja, Mr. Prabhat Ranjan and Mr. Jatin Tyagi, Advs. versus SH GURCHARAN SINGH OTHERS .....Respondents Through: Mr. J.K. Bhola, Mr. Mohit Mittal, Ms. Muskan Bhola and Mr. Siddhant Saraswat, Advs. for R-6 to 8 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU TARA VITASTA GANJU, J.: (Oral) 1. The present Petition has been filed on behalf of the Petitioners/landlords impugning the order dated 16.02.2021 [hereinafter after referred to as “Impugned Order”] passed by the learned CCJ-cum-ARC (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi with respect to the premises i.e., property no. 13, Church Mission Road, Fatehpuri, Chandni Chowk, Delhi-110006 [hereinafter referred to as “subject premises”]. By the Impugned Order, the leave to defend Application filed by the Respondents/tenants has been allowed in view of the triable issues raised by the Respondents/tenants. 2. The record reflects that by an order dated 19.02.2024 a Coordinate Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed RC.REV. 63/2021 Page 1 of 20 By:GEETA JOSHI Signing Date:22.03.2025 05:35:55 Bench of this Court had stayed the proceedings before the Trial Court which was recording evidence. This position obtains even as on date. In view thereof, this Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal today. 3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners/landlords submits that the Impugned Order has been passed raising two triable issues. Relying on the conclusion as set out by the learned Trial Court in paragraph 8 of the Impugned Order, the learned Counsel for the Petitioners/landlord submits that the first triable issue that requires adjudication is the rel