M/s A M ELECTRICALS v. CHANDRA KANTA AGARWAL

Delhi High Court · 12 Oct 2017 · 2017:DHC:6080
Jayant Nath
RC REV. 459/2016
2017:DHC:6080
property appeal_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court dismissed the revision petition challenging the eviction order under the Delhi Rent Control Act, upholding the landlord's right to evict the tenant on valid grounds.

Full Text
Translation output
RC REV. 459/2016
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Pronounced on: 12.10.2017
RC.REV. 459/2016 & CM Nos.35173-35174/2016
M/s A M ELECTRICALS ..... Petitioner
Through Mr.G.P.Thareja, Mr.Satyam Thareja, Ms.Shradha Karol, and Mr. Mishal Johri, Advocates
VERSUS
CHANDRA KANTA AGARWAL ..... Respondent
Through Mr.Sudhanshu Batra, Senior Advocate with Mr.Subhash Mishra and Mr.Shashwat
V.Dubey,Advocates .
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.
JUDGMENT

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 5.5.2016 passed by the Additional Rent Controller (hereinafter referred to as ‘the ARC’). Respondent/landlord had filed an eviction petition under section 14(1)(e) of the DRC Act for property being Shop No. 1869, Mahalaxmi Market, Chandni Chowk, Delhi, having basement and mezzanine portions. The tenancy is said to have been created vide Lease deed dated 11.2.1992. The present rate of rent is Rs.235.80 per month. The respondent is the owner and landlady. 2017:DHC:6080 RC REV. 459/2016

2. The facts and issues raised in the present petition are identical to the facts and issues in RC.REV. 456/2016 titled as Kamlesh Kumar Jain vs. Chandra Kanta Agarwal. The said RC.REV. 456/2016 pertains to a property bearing no. 1872/P, Mahalaxmi Market, Chandni Chowk, Delhi 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 above noted Revision Petition.

3. By order passed today the said Revision Petition has been dismissed. For the same reasons and grounds, this petition is also dismissed. All pending applications also stand dismissed.

JUDGE OCTOBER 12, 2017 n