Full Text
Translation output
RC REV. 89/2015 Page 1
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 01.09.2016
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 01.09.2016
RC.REV.89/2015
AMTUL HABIB ....Petitioner
Through Mr.Amiet Andlay and Mr.Amit Sharma, Advocates
AMTUL HABIB ....Petitioner
Through Mr.Amiet Andlay and Mr.Amit Sharma, Advocates
VERSUS
MAUJMA KHAN …Respondent
Through Mr.L.C.Rajput, Advocate
Through Mr.L.C.Rajput, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J. (ORAL)
The present Revision Petition is filed under Section 25B(8) of the
Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as The ‘DRC Act’) seeking to impugn the order dated 23.9.2014 by which the ARC allowed the application for leave to defend filed by the respondent/tenant. The petitioner filed the present Eviction Petition under section 14(1)(e) of the DRC Act regarding Shop No.4913, Bara Hindu Rao, Gali Darjian, Delhi.
The ARC granted to the respondent leave to defend. The order is identical to an order passed relating to adjoining property being Shop
No.4912. This court in a revision petition against the said order, being
RC.Rev. 88/2015 titled as Amtul Habib v. Maujma Khan, vide order dated
01.09.2016, quashed the order dated 23.09.2014 and passed an eviction order.
For the reasons stated in the
The present Revision Petition is filed under Section 25B(8) of the
Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as The ‘DRC Act’) seeking to impugn the order dated 23.9.2014 by which the ARC allowed the application for leave to defend filed by the respondent/tenant. The petitioner filed the present Eviction Petition under section 14(1)(e) of the DRC Act regarding Shop No.4913, Bara Hindu Rao, Gali Darjian, Delhi.
The ARC granted to the respondent leave to defend. The order is identical to an order passed relating to adjoining property being Shop
No.4912. This court in a revision petition against the said order, being
RC.Rev. 88/2015 titled as Amtul Habib v. Maujma Khan, vide order dated
01.09.2016, quashed the order dated 23.09.2014 and passed an eviction order.
For the reasons stated in the
JUDGMENT
dated 01.09.2016 passed in
RC.Rev. 88/2015, the present petition is allowed and the order dated
23.09.2014 granting leave to defend to the respondent is quashed.
2016:DHC:6231
RC.Rev. 88/2015, the present petition is allowed and the order dated
23.09.2014 granting leave to defend to the respondent is quashed.
2016:DHC:6231
RC REV. 89/2015 Page 2
The eviction order is passed in favour of the petitioner and against the respondent. However, the same shall not be executed in terms of Section
14(7) of the DRC Act within six months from today.
(JAYANT NATH)
JUDGE
SEPTEMBER 01, 2016/n/v 2016:DHC:6231
The eviction order is passed in favour of the petitioner and against the respondent. However, the same shall not be executed in terms of Section
14(7) of the DRC Act within six months from today.
(JAYANT NATH)
JUDGE
SEPTEMBER 01, 2016/n/v 2016:DHC:6231