Delhi High Court - Orders
Ghanshyam Goel vs Harjeet Singh on 14 May, 2026
Author: Amit Sharma
Bench: Amit Sharma
$~72
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ RC.REV. 28/2026
GHANSHYAM GOEL .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Aditya Aggarwal & Mr. Ankit
Mutreja & Mr. Yasir, Advs.
versus
HARJEET SINGH .....Respondent
Through:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA
ORDER
% 14.05.2026
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. CM APPL. 32714/2026(Early hearing)
2. The present application under Section 151 of the CPC seeks the following prayers:-
(a) May allow the present application and may prepone the next date of hearing to an earlier date of hearing, and may dispose of CM. Appl. No. 5657/2026 i.e Application under article 227 of The Constitution of India read with Section 151 of The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 on behalf of the revisionist for keeping the operation of the Impugned Order dated 26.11.2025 passed by Sh. Vivek Kumar Aggarwal, Ld. JSCC-cum-ASCJ-cum-
Guardian Judge-02, (West) previously posted as Additional Rent Controller-02 (central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in case titled as "Sh. Harjeet Singh vs. Sh. Ghanshyam Goel" (RC ARC No. 191/2022) in abeyance till the disposal of the revision petition pending before this Hon'ble Court
(b) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit be given to the revisionist under the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice."
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/05/2026 at 22:08:15
3. The captioned petition has been filed assailing the impugned order dated 26.11.2025 passed by learned JSCC-Cum-ASCJ-CUM-Guardian Judge-02 (West), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi whereby the application seeking leave to defend filed on behalf of the petitioner was dismissed by learned ARC and eviction was passed in favour of the respondent and eviction petition on behalf of the respondent was allowed. The present petition is already listed on 05.08.2026.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant draws the attention of this Court to an application under Section 151 of the CPC, filed by the petitioner for bringing on record additional facts and in particular the following paragraph:-
"2. That the one shop of the Petitioner also vacated by his tenant whereas the name and style of M/S Diamond Bakery having large area with three shutters on dated 18.01.2025 and now the Petitioner is having sufficient accommodation, hence the Petitioner is not having_bonafide requirement for vacating the shop from the Respondent as the measurement of the shop of the Respondent is very less. The above said, vacant shop lies in the same premise there respondent shop constitute. The aforesaid facts is crystal clear from the Photographs annexed herewith with the present application for proper adjudication of the Petition (photos annexed 4 pages).
(Emphasis supplied)
5. It is submitted that despite bringing these facts on record, the learned ARC while passing the impugned order dated 26.11.2025 had erred in observing that respondent had not specified as to whether the said shops are situated in the same building where the subject premises is situated.
6. Attention of this Court has also been drawn to the following observation This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/05/2026 at 22:08:15 by the learned ARC:-
"8.10 Heard. It is observed that at the very first, the petitioner has denied the availability of space at the upper floor of the building and moreover, the upper floors of the building cannot be an alternate to the subject premises, which are situated at the ground floor. It is a matter of common knowledge that a shop at the ground floors attracts more customer than the shop at the upper floors. Again regarding the shops in the area of Vikas Puri, it is observed that respondent himself has stated that petitioner has already sold one of the said shops and two other shops were already let out. Again regarding the vacation of the shop, as mentioned in the additional affidavit, it is observed that the respondent has not specified anything that in what manner and why the said shop with three shutters was vacated by the Diamond Bakery in January 2025. Again it is also not specified in the additional affidavit if the said shop was situated in the same building where the subject premises are situated. Moreover, there is nothing on record to conclude if said Diamond Bakery was the tenant of the petitioner only.The respondent has mentioned about the said tenant in the application for leave to defend, however, same has been denied by the petitioner in his reply to said application. Moreover, it is for the land-lord / petitioner to decide what shop will be of the best use for the business to be run by his son and it cannot be presumed that even if the other shop was allegedly vacated by the other tenant, it can be an alternate accommodation against the tenanted premises."
(Emphasis supplied)
7. On the petitioner taking necessary steps, issue notice to the respondent, through all permissible modes, for the date already fixed i.e. 05.08.2026.
8. In the meantime, the execution proceedings shall remain deferred till the next date of hearing.
9. Copy of the order be sent to learned JSCC-cum-ASCJ-cum-Guardian This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/05/2026 at 22:08:15 Judge-02, (West), Tis Hazari Court, for necessary information and compliance.
10. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court, forthwith.
AMIT SHARMA, J MAY 14, 2026/nk/ah This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/05/2026 at 22:08:15