Rajiv Sahai Endlaw JUDGMENT
Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J.
Caveat No. 933/2017
1. The counsel for the caveator/respondent has appeared.
2. The caveat stands discharged.
CM No. 39137/2017 (for exemption)
3. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
4. The application is disposed of.
RC.REV. 495/2017 & CMs No. 39135/2017 (for stay) & 39136/2017 (for condonation of 42 days delay in re-filing the petition)
5. This Rent Control Revision Petition under Section 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 impugns the order [dated 17th May, 2017 in CIS No. 80568/2016 (Old E. No. 135/2016) of the Court of Rent Controller (RC), Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi] of dismissal of the application of the petitioners/tenants for leave to defend the petition for eviction under Section 14(1)(e) of the Act filed by the respondent/landlord and the consequent order of eviction of the petitioners/tenants from Shop No. 602, Ground Floor, Main Road, Sadar Bazar, Delhi-110006.
6. The counsel for the petitioners/tenants has been heard and the copies of the Trial Court record filed with the paper book perused. The counsel for the respondent/landlord has during the course of hearing also handed over a paper book containing the certified copies of the entire Trial Court record.
7. The counsel for the petitioners/tenants, on enquiry, states that the petitioners/tenants are not controverting that the respondent/landlord is the owner of the shop in the tenancy of the petitioners/tenants and that there is a relationship of landlord and tenant between the petitioners/tenants on the one hand and the respondent/landlord on the other hand. Thus the discussion hereinafter will be confined only to the aspect of bona fide requirement and availability of alternate suitable accommodation.
8. The respondent/landlord instituted the petition for eviction from which this petition arises, pleading i) that the respondent/landlord is the sole proprietor of M/s. J.P. Cotton Mills and is engaged in the business of narrow woven fabrics (Niwar), ropes, hook and loop tapes, cordage etc.; ii) that the office/store of the aforesaid business is situated in property No. 4663, Gali Mohar Singh Jat, Pahari Dhiraj, Delhi which is a residential ancestral property; iii) that the respondent/landlord is in possession only of a small portion at the first floor of the said property from where he is carrying on his business aforesaid; iv) that the other portions of the said property No. 4663, Gali Mohar Singh Jat, Pahari Dhiraj, Delhi are in possession of the brother of the respondent/landlord and the sons of another brother of the respondent/landlord; v) that property No. 4663, Gali Mohar Singh Jat, Pahari Dhiraj, Delhi is even otherwise situated in a very narrow lane/gali where there is no vehicular movement and only two wheelers and manual cycles can ply; vi) that the same causes inconvenience to the respondent/landlord in bringing in and taking out the goods; vii) that the respondent/landlord requires the Shop No. 602, Ground Floor, Main Road, Sadar Bazar, Delhi in the tenancy of the petitioners/tenants for carrying on his aforesaid business; viii) that Sadar Bazar is even otherwise one of the largest, busy and reputed retail and wholesale market of Asia/India; ix) that the elder son of the respondent/landlord viz. Sanjay Gu........