Janki Nath Sahni & Anr vs Ram Mohan Seth (Deceased) Thr Lrs
2023 Latest Caselaw 703 Del

                                                Neutral Citation Number : 2023/DHC/001539


                          $~ (Single Bench)
                          *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          %                                     Judgment delivered on: 28.02.2023

                          +      RC. REV. 176/2018 & CM. APPLS. 3937/2023, 5191/2023

                          JANKI NATH SAHNI & ANR.                                           ..... Petitioners

                                                   versus

                          RAM MOHAN SETH (DECEASED) THR LRS                             .....Respondents
                          Advocates who appeared in this case:

                          For the Petitioner: Mr. Raj Kumar, Advocate with Mr. Kapil Sahni, son of
                                              petitioner No.2.
                          For the Respondent: Mr. Rajeev Verma and Mr. Dheeraj Sharma, Advocates
                                              with Mr. Munish Seth.
                          CORAM:-
                          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
                                                   JUDGMENT

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. Appellant impugns judgment dated 06.01.2018, whereby the eviction petition filed by the appellant under Section 14 (1) (e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, has been dismissed.

2. Appellants had filed the subject eviction petition seeking eviction of respondent- Ram Mohan Seth (since expired) and now represented by his legal heirs from one shop measuring 6-1/2 feet x 10 feet in Ward No.3, property bearing No.3145-47 and 3148 (half) and 3153 (new) on the ground floor of the said property, more particularly, described as shop in property bearing No.3146, Ground Floor, Ward

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:KUNAL MAGGU Signing Date:02.03.2023 17:02:10 Neutral Citation Number : 2023/DHC/001539

No.3, Ram Bazar, Mori Gate, Delhi, shown in red colour in the site plan, Ex.PW-1/RX3. The subject shop is the shop in centre of the property on the front side.

3. Eviction petition was filed contending that the property is owned by the petitioners, who are brothers and landlords of the subject premises. Petitioner No.2, Ashok Kumar Sahni had contended that he has two sons, Jatin Sahni and Kapil Sahni. Both the sons are married. Elder son, Sh. Jatin Sahni was carrying on business of clothes at Gandhi Nagar and is settled and looking after his family from the business carried on by him. The younger son of Ashok Kumar Sahni i.e. Mr. Kapil Sahni was then unemployed and wanted to start a business from the subject shop.

4. The eviction petition was filed on 27.04.2012. The younger son, Mr. Kapil Sahni has since completed his graduation in Law and has enrolled as an Advocate in 2013 i.e., after the filing of the eviction petition.

5. Leave to defend was granted to the respondent and thereafter, after trial the eviction petition had been dismissed. The respondent- tenant had contended that there were alternative accommodation available with the petitioners in the form of a godown which was on the rear of the property and had subsequently got vacated.

6. The case of the petitioner is that the godown was got vacated from its earlier tenant for the purposes of residence of the petitioner No.2 and his family and was not a suitable alternative accommodation

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:KUNAL MAGGU Signing Date:02.03.2023 17:02:10 Neutral Citation Number : 2023/DHC/001539

for the purposes of running a shop or opening of an office.

7. After some arguments, learned counsel for the respondents under instructions from Mr. Munish Seth, one of the legal heirs of the erstwhile tenant submits that there is no dispute with regard to the fact that the petitioners are the owners and landlords of the subject premises. There is also no dispute that relationship of landlord and tenant exists between the parties. He further under instructions from Mr. Munish Seth admits and acknowledges that the need of the petitioners is bona fides and that they have no other suitable alternative accommodation.

8. Respondents admit and acknowledge that the impugned judgment dated 06.01.2018 being erroneous be set aside and concede that an order of eviction be passed under Section 14 (1) (e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act. Learned counsel under instructions prays that one year time be granted to the respondents to vacate the subject tenanted premises.

9. In view of the above, the impugned order dated 06.01.2018 is set aside and an order of eviction is passed in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents under Section 14 (1) (e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act in respect of shop measuring 6-1/2 feet x 10 feet in Ward No.3, property bearing No.3145-47 and 3148 (half) and 3153 (new) on the ground floor of the said property, more particularly, described as shop in property bearing No.3146, Ground Floor, Ward No.3, Ram Bazar, Mori Gate, Delhi, shown in red colour in the site plan, Ex.PW-

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:KUNAL MAGGU Signing Date:02.03.2023 17:02:10 Neutral Citation Number : 2023/DHC/001539

1/RX3. The shop in centre of the property on the front side.

10. In view of Section 14 (7), the respondents are entitled to time of six months to vacate the premises, however, in view of the submission made by the respondent, on an affidavit of undertaking being filed by the respondents within two weeks, with copy to learned counsel for petitioner, the order of eviction passed today be not executed till 29.02.2024. Respondents in the affidavit of undertaking shall undertake that they shall continue to pay a sum of ₹ 600/- per month as use and occupation charges to the petitioners till the time they hand over the peaceful vacant possession of the tenanted premises to the petitioner i.e. or before 29.02.2024.

11. Learned counsel for respondents undertakes that respondents shall clear all water, electricity and other dues/charges in respect of the tenanted premises before the petitioner vacates the premises on or before 29.02.2024.

12. Learned counsel further undertakes that the respondents shall not sublet, assign or part with the possession of the tenanted premises or any part thereof. He further undertakes that respondents shall not cause any damage to the property and shall hand over the peaceful vacant possession of the tenanted premises to the petitioner in a condition as existing today, subject to normal wear and tear.

13. The undertaking is accepted.

14. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the undertaking

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:KUNAL MAGGU Signing Date:02.03.2023 17:02:10 Neutral Citation Number : 2023/DHC/001539

is acceptable to the petitioner.

15. The Petition is accordingly disposed of in the above terms.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.

FEBRUARY 28, 2023 NA

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:KUNAL MAGGU Signing Date:02.03.2023 17:02:10