Delhi District Court
Mohd. Idris vs Mohd. Ayyub Ansari on 21 December, 2016
IN THE COURT OF ACJCCJARC, SHAHDARA DISTRICT, KARKARDOOMA
COURTS, DELHI.
Presided By : Sh. Jay Thareja, DJS
ARC No:1215/2016
Mohd. Idris
S/o Late Sh. Saddique
R/o H. No.12A/26, Gali No.10
Vijay Mohalla, Maujpur
Delhi110053. ... Petitioner
Versus
Mohd. Ayyub Ansari
S/o Late Sh. Abdul Salam
R/o H. No. 12A/26, (1st Floor)
Gali No.10, Vijay Mohalla,
Maujpur, Delhi110053. ... Respondent
APPLICATION/PETITION U/S 14(1)(e) OF DELHI RENT
CONTROL ACT, 1958, FOR EVICTION OF TENANT
DATE OF INSTITUTION :24.09.2016
DATE OF ARGUMENTS : 15.12.2016
DATE OF DECISION : 21.12.2016
JUDGMENT
1. The present case has originated from an application/petition (henceforth 'petition') filed under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (henceforth 'DRC Act, 1958') by Mohd. Idris (henceforth 'petitioner') against Sh. Ayyub Ansari (henceforth 'respondent') seeking eviction of the respondent from one room measuring about 10x15 feet, situated at the front side of the first floor of property bearing H.No.12A,/26, Gali No.10, Vijay Mohalla, Maujpur, Delhi110053, as shown in red colour in the site plan filed ARC No.1215/2016 Mohd. Idris v Mohd. Ayyub Ansari Page no. 1 of 3 alongwith the petition (henceforth 'tenanted premises'). In the petition, it is interalia pleaded that the petitioner is the owner and landlord qua the tenanted premises; that the respondent was inducted as a tenant by the petitioner vide rent agreement dated 26.02.1996; that the current rate of rent payable by the respondent qua the tenanted premises is Rs.3000/ per month; that the family of the petitioner comprises of his wife, son, Mohd. Javed (23 years old) and daughter, Afrin (21 years old); that Mohd. Javed and Afrin are unemployed and of marriageable age; that the petitioner and his family are short of space at H.No.12A,/26, Gali No.10, Vijay Mohalla, Maujpur, Delhi110053 and that the petitioner bonafidely requires the tenanted premises for opening of beauty parlour/boutique by his daughter, Afrin.
2. The record of the Court file shows that notice/summons qua this petition was/were ordered to be issued qua the respondent as per the form specified in the third schedule of the DRC Act, 1958 on 26.09.2016. The said notice/summons were served upon the respondent, through his adult daughter, Mumtaz, on 07.11.2016. Upon such service, the respondent has filed the leave to defend application as per Section 25B(4) of the DRC Act, 1958, on 24.11.2016. There is a two days delay in the filing of leave to defend application by the respondent, which cannot be condoned by this Court, in view of the law laid down in Prithipal Singh (Dead) through LRs v. Satpal Singh, 2010 (2) SCC 15 and Bhim Sen Batra v Shreyans Buildwell Pvt. Ltd., 215 (2) RCR (Rent) 88.
3. In Section 25B(4) of the DRC Act, 1958, it is stated that in cases arising from an application/petition filed by a landlord under Section 14(1)(e) etc. for bonafide requirement, if the respondent/tenant does not filed leave to defend application within 15 ARC No.1215/2016 Mohd. Idris v Mohd. Ayyub Ansari Page no. 2 of 3 days from date of service, the contents of the application/petition shall be deemed to be admitted by the respondent/tenant and the petitioner/landlord shall be entitled to an Order for eviction on the ground of bonafide requirement. Thus, keeping in view the specific mandate of Section 25(4) of the DRC Act, 1958 and the fact that the respondent herein has not filed leave to defend application, the present petition is allowed. It is directed that the respondent be evicted and the petitioner be put in possession of one room measuring about 10x15 feet, situated at the front side of the first floor of property bearing H.No.12 A,/26, Gali No.10, Vijay Mohalla, Maujpur, Delhi110053, as shown in red colour in the site plan filed alongwith the petition.
4. Before parting with this Order, it is clarified that as per Section 14(7) of the DRC Act, 1958, this Order shall not be enforceable for the period of six months from today.
5. After completion of necessary formalities by the Ahlmad, the file shall be consigned to the record room.
Announced in open Court (Jay Thareja)
today on 21.12.2016 ACJ/CCJ/ARC/Shahdara
Karkardooma Courts/Delhi
ARC No.1215/2016
Mohd. Idris v Mohd. Ayyub Ansari
Page no. 3 of 3