Delhi High Court
Sandeep Jain vs Arjun Uppal & Anr. on 16 November, 2017
$~A-
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Pronounced on: 16.11.2017
+ RC.REV. 27/2016 & CM No. 1866/2017
SANDEEP JAIN ..... Petitioner
Through Mr.Prakash Sharma, Advocate
versus
ARJUN UPPAL & ANR. ..... Respondent
Through Mr. Nikhil Singhvi, Mr. Nakul, Mr.
Aubert Sebastian and Ms. Nikita Pandey,
Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH
JAYANT NATH, J.
1. This revision petition is filed under section 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent
Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the 'DRC Act') seeking to
impugn the eviction order dated 31.08.2015 passed by the Additional Rent
Controller (hereinafter referred to as 'the ARC').
2. Respondent/landlord had filed an eviction petition under section
14(1)(e) of the DRC Act for property being No. 1645, Shyama Prasad,
Mukherjee Marg, Delhi-110006. The tenancy is said to have been created
vide Lease deed dated 11.2.1992. The rent paid by the petitioner is said
stated to be Rs.158.36 per month. The respondents are joint owners of the
property. It is urged that the respondent No.2 is a hotelier and is running a
hotel under the name and style of M/s.New Royal Hotel from the first and
upward floors of the property in question. The Eviction Petition has filed for
the bona fide need of respondent No.1 who who has decided to open a plush
restaurant for which he has got a project report prepared. It is urged that
there are about 50 hotels in the vicinity of the tenanted property but there is
no posh restaurant in the area. The respondent is said to require an area of
approximately 5000 sq.ft. to open his restaurant and hence requires the entire
ground floor portion to complete his project. Respondent No.1 is said to have
sufficient knowledge and experience of working at the family hotel business
since he has returned from Australia.
3. The facts and issues raised in the present petition are identical to the
facts and issues in RC.REV. 116/2016 titled as M/s Seth & Sons Private
Limited vs. Arjun Uppal & Anr. The said RC.REV. 116/2016 pertains to a
property bearing no. 1647, Shyama Prasad, Mukherjee Marg, Delhi-110006,
which is adjacent to the property in question in the present petition. Both the
petitions have a common respondent. The contentions raised by the
petitioner are also virtually identical to the contention raised by the petitioner
in the above noted Revision Petition. This fact of similiarty of the facts and
issues with RC.REV. 116/2016 was admitted by learned counsel for the
petitioner when this matter was listed.
4. By order passed on the said Revision Petition has been dismissed. For
the same reasons and grounds, this petition is also dismissed.
All pending applications also stand dismissed.
(JAYANT NATH)
JUDGE
NOVEMBER 16, 2017/v
