K S BAKSHI & ORS. vs SURINDER NATH HUF & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 10.01.2025 + RC.REV. 393/2024 & CM APPL. 75463/2024 K S BAKSHI & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Abhijat, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Ravi Krishan Chandna, Mr. Harshvardhan Gupta, Mr. Mudit Ruhella, Mr. Malyaj Sehgal, Advs. versus SURINDER NATH HUF & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Anil Sapra, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Manish Makhija, Mr. Sarthak Katiyal, Mr. Shyam Gaur, Ms. Simran Makhija, Mr. Shyam Gaur, Advs. Ms. Manisha Agarwal Narain, CGSC with Mr. Sandeep Singh Somaria, Adv. for UOI 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/tenants seeking to challenge an order dated 07.06.2024 passed by Ld. ACJ/ARC/CCJ-New Delhi District, Patiala House Courts in RC ARC 5507/2016 [hereinafter referred to as ‘Impugned Order’]. By the Impugned Order, the Respondents/landlords were held entitled for recovery of the tenanted premises i.e. property bearing no. 20/48, First Floor, Malcha Marg, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi 110021 [hereinafter referred to as ‘subject premises’]. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:GEETA JOSHI Signing Date:04.02.2025 RC.REV. 393/2024 Page 1 of 24 22:18:29 2. This Court had on 23.12.2024 after hearing the arguments on behalf of both parties, had examined the matter in its entirety and thereafter, gave a finding on the grounds raised by the Petitioners/tenants, including the record of the learned Trial Court as filed with the Petition. It is apposite to set out the relevant extract of this order: “… 9. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners/tenants submits that the Rent Controller has no jurisdiction to entertain the present Petition, in view of the fact that the rental for the su