MOHD YAHYA & ORS vs FARAT ARA & ORS

Judgment text excerpt

$~J- * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 17th November, 2025 + RC.REV. 120/2019 MOHD YAHYA & ORS .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Trilok Nath Saxena and Dr. Shiv Kumar Tiwari, Advocates. versus FARAT ARA & ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Zeeshan Ahmed, Advocate for R- 3. R-3 in-person. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI J U D G M E N T ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI J. REVIEW PET. 466/2025 By way of the present review petition filed under section 114 read with Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 („CPC‟), the petitioners seek review of order dated 05.08.2025 passed by this court in RC. REV. 120/2019. 2. Vide order dated 05.08.2025, this court had disposed-of the revision petition, upholding impugned order dated 28.08.2018 passed by the learned CCJ-cum-ARC, Pilot Court, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in eviction petition bearing E. No.11/2018, with the following observations: “15. In the opinion of this court, the learned Rent Controller has, with full deliberation and application of mind, decided all 03 issues, namely, the existence of landlord-tenant Signature Not Verified Signed By:ANJALI KAUSHIK RC.REV. 120/2019 Page 1 of 9 Signing Date:17.11.2025 14:42:07 relationship between the parties, the bona-fide requirement of the respondents, as well as the non-availability of suitable, alternate accommodation, in accordance with law. 16. Other things apart, it is also noticed that the petitioners have been in occupation of the subject premises, which is a shop in one of the busiest wholesale markets of the city, since the 1940s; and the last paid rent was Rs. 2178/- per month. 17. With the petitioners having occupied the tenanted premises for about 85 years, the respondents had to litigate before the learned Rent Controller