SITA RAM & SON vs MANOJ KUMAR JAIN

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 27.03.2025 + RC.REV. 81/2019 & CM APPL. 8540/2020 SITA RAM & SON .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rakesh Mukhija and Ms. Pooja Makhija and Ms. Samridhi Makhija, Advocates versus MANOJ KUMAR JAIN .....Respondent Through: Mr. Ashok Gurnani and Mr. Abhishek Singh, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. By way of present revision petition filed under Section 25-B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act 1958 (hereinafter, referred to as ‘DRC Act’), the petitioner/tenant seek to assail order dated 20.08.2018 passed by the Court of the Additional Rent Controller, Tis Hazari Courts, District Central, Delhi in ‘Eviction Petition No.430/2018’, titled ‘Manoj Kumar Jain v. Sita Ram & Sons,’ vide which an eviction order was passed in favour of the respondent/landlord herein, for recovery of tenanted premises, i.e., Shop Bearing No.2668, situated on the Ground Floor, Gali Anar, Kinari Bazar, Delhi-110006 (hereinafter, ‘subject property’). 2. Notably, the eviction petition came to be filed by the respondent/landlord under Section 14 (1) (e) of the DRC Act, thereby seeking the petitioner’s eviction from the aforesaid subject property on the Signature Not Verified RC.REV. 81/2019 Page 1 of 4 Digitally Signed By:GAUTAM ASWAL Signing Date:05.04.2025 15:47:18 grounds of bonafide requirement of the respondent’s son - Mr. Akshay Jain. It was stated that the petitioner was inducted in the tenanted premises by the erstwhile owner Shri Raj Bahadur from whom the respondent along with his brother Mukesh Kumar Jain jointly purchased the property. It was further claimed that the subject property was partitioned amongst the brothers, and as a result of which the tenanted shop came to the share of the respondent here