Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Kavita Jawa vs Kartik Chaudhary & Anr on 25 February, 2020

Author: Sanjeev Sachdeva

Bench: Sanjeev Sachdeva

$~61
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+      RC.REV. 113/2020
       KAVITA JAWA                                        ..... Petitioner
                          Through:     Mr. Pawan Kawrani and Mr. Jitesh
                                       Talwani, Advs.
                          versus

       KARTIK CHAUDHARY & ANR                              ..... Respondents
                   Through: None

       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
                          ORDER

% 25.02.2020 CM APPL. 7508/2020 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

RC.REV. 113/2020 and CM APPL. 7507/2020 (Stay)

1. Petitioner impugns order dated 02.09.2019, whereby the leave to defend application of the petitioner was dismissed and an eviction order passed.

2. Respondents had filed the subject eviction petition contending that respondent No. 1 was running a general merchant shop from a rented accommodation and wanted to shift to his own premises, which was tenanted with the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner in the leave to defend application had categorically stated that the respondents were carrying on the general merchant business from RC.REV. 113/2020 1 their own property which owned by them and not from any rented accommodation. He submits that in response thereto, the contention of the respondent is that the property from which the general merchant shop was being carried out devolved upon the grandmother of the respondents by virtue of Will of the grandfather.

4. Learned counsel submits that as per the Will of the grandfather, the property had to devolve upon the grandmother and then to the father of the respondents and at the time of filing of the eviction petition, both the grandmother and father had already expired and the property had thus devolved upon the respondents. He submits that the contention of the respondents that they have no right in the said shop was ex facie incorrect.

5. Issue notice to the respondents, returnable on 10th September, 2020.

6. In the meantime, execution of order dated 02.09.2019 shall remain stayed.

7. Order dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

8. Digital copy of the Rent Controller's record be requisitioned.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J FEBRUARY 25, 2020 PB RC.REV. 113/2020 2