VINEET BABBAR vs KULJEET SINGH BINDRA

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: December 02, 2025 % Pronounced on: January 05, 2026 + RC.REV. 58/2020 VINEET BABBAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Pawanjit Singh Bindra, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vinayak Marwah, Advocate. Versus KULJEET SINGH BINDRA .....Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner/ landlord1 filed an Eviction Petition being RC/ ARC No.26126/ 2016 under Section 14(1)(e) read with Section 25(B) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 19582 against the respondent/ tenant3 before the learned SCJ cum RC, (West District) Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi4, seeking eviction from one shop at ground floor of property bearing no.17/ 41A, Tilak Nagar, New Delhi-110 018.5 2. Since the application seeking leave to defend of the tenant was allowed by the learned ARC vide order dated 19.12.2018, based on the evidence led by both the parties and the arguments advanced by the learned counsels for both the parties, the learned ARC has proceeded to 1 Hereinafter referred to as “landlord” 2 Hereinafter referred to as “DRC Act” 3 Hereinafter referred to as “tenant” 4 Hereinafter referred to as “learned ARC” 5 Hereinafter referred to as “subject premises” RC.REV. 58/2020 Page 1 of 8 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:BABLOO SHAH Signing Date:05.01.2026 15:15:23 pass a judgment dated 16.10.20196 holding that there was no bona fide requirement for the subject premises by the landlord. 3. Hence, the present revision petition filed by the landlord seeking setting aside of the impugned judgment dated 16.10.2019 passed by the learned ARC. 4. Based on the factual position and the document(s) on record, since the landlord tenant relationship between the parties has been held to be duly admitted by the learned ARC, and it ha