Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

e) That great hardship will be caused to the respondent if the tenanted premises is got vacated as he is running a shop from the tenanted premises.

6. Reply to the application for leave to defend has been filed by the petitioner wherein the petitioner has denied all the averments made by the respondent in his leave to defend application stating that the petitioner has mentioned in the original eviction petition that the eight properties at Church Road, Kashmere Gate, Delhi are occupied by different tenants and no shop is available to the petitioner and her family members to carry on business by her son Sh. Mohd. Yusuf Jibran. It is further submitted that shops no. 9 & 10 situated at Vishal Market, Bhai Parmanand Colony, Kingsway Camp, Delhi, was purchased in the name of the petitioner by her father Sh. S.H. Atiq­ur­Rehman on 09.07.1982 and 10.08.1982 respectively and since then, both the shops are under tenancy of M/s. Harsons, the partnership firm of her father Sh. S.H. Atiq­ ur­Rehman and her two brothers namely, Sh. Shahid Atiq and Sh. Nasir Atiq. It is submitted that M/s. Harsons is having its regd. office at 4791­92, Chandni Chowk, Delhi. That earlier M/s Harsons was having a Wholesale Drug Licence under Drug & Cosmetics Act and shop no. 9 was being used for purpose of storing the medicines till 31.12.1998 and shop no. 10 was being used for the purpose of storing Britania Biscuits, etc.. Thereafter, M/s Harsons started running business of Plastic Artificial Flowers in Chandni Chowk, Delhi and used shops no. 9 & 10 at Kingsway Camp, Delhi for storing plastic raw materials as a godown. The copy of the Partnership Deed between the various partners of M/s Harsons dated 24.11.2006 is filed by the petitioner. As far as property no.

25. Further, the respondent has alleged that the petitioner is also having occupation of shop no. 9 & 10 situated at B­7­8, Vishal Market, Bhai Paramanand Colony, Kingsway Camp, Delhi. According to the respondent, these shops are lying vacant and thus, are suitable for the need of the petitioner's son. The petitioner has refuted these assertions by stating that though, these shops are owned by her, being purchased in her name by her deceased father but the same are under tenancy of M/s Harsons, the partnership firm of her father Sh. S.H. Atiq­ur­Rehman and her two brothers namely, Sh. Shahid Atiq and Sh. Nasir Atiq. It is submitted that M/s. Harsons is having its regd. office at 4791­92, Chandni Chowk, Delhi. That earlier M/s Harsons was having a Wholesale Drug Licence under Drug & Cosmetics Act and shop no. 9 was being used for purpose of storing the medicines till 31.12.1998 and shop no. 10 was being used for the purpose of storing Britania Biscuits, etc.. Thereafter, M/s Harsons started running business of Plastic Artificial Flowers in Chandni Chowk, Delhi and presently, is using shops no. 9 & 10 at Kingsway Camp, Delhi for storing plastic raw materials for godown purposes. The petitioner has placed on record the letter dated 01.06.1995 written on behalf of the said firm to Drug Controller seeking renewal of wholesale drug license for godown at shop no. 9. This letter pertains to the period when the said firm was involved in medicines business. Photocopy of the renewal of said license in favour of M/s Harsons has also been placed on record. The petitioner has also placed on record the copy of the Partnership Deed dated 24.11.2006 executed between the various partners of M/s Harsons. The respondent has not disputed the veracity of the Partnership Deed as well as Drug License issued in favour of M/s Harsons, thus proving that M/s Harsons is presently carrying on business of Plastic Artificial Flowers in Chandni Chowk and using the abovesaid two shops bearing no. 9 & 10 at Kingsway Camp for storing the plastic raw materials and are using the said shops for godown purposes and thus, the said shops cannot be termed as alternative suitable accommodation available with the petitioner to meet out the bonafide requirement of her son. Further, the respondent has failed to place to record any documentary proof to show that these two shops are lying vacant and not under the possession of the tenant M/s Harsons.