The Court emphasized the necessity for landlords to present credible evidence of need and lack of alternative accommodation under the Delhi Rent Control Act.
In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has dismissed an eviction petition filed by landlords Mohd Akhtar and others against tenant Abdul Rehan under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958. The landlords sought eviction on the grounds of bona fide requirement, claiming an urgent need to accommodate their large family and citing the dilapidated condition of the premises.
Presiding over the case, Justice Saurabh Banerjee upheld the judgment of the Additional Rent Controller, which had previously dismissed the eviction petition. The court found that the landlords failed to substantiate their claims of a bona fide requirement for the subject premises located at D-45, First Floor, Zakir Nagar (West), Jamia Nagar, Okhla, New Delhi.
The landlords argued that they required the premises due to the expansion of their family, which allegedly could not be accommodated in their existing properties. They further claimed that the property in question was structurally unsafe, necessitating urgent repairs.
However, the tenant contested these claims, highlighting inconsistencies in the landlords' statements regarding available accommodations. The tenant pointed out that the landlords possessed other properties with vacant rooms and had recently let out newly constructed flats during the pendency of earlier eviction proceedings.
The court scrutinized the evidence presented, including a structural engineer's report submitted by the landlords, and found discrepancies in the dates of the photographs used to demonstrate the property's condition. The court also noted that the landlords' action of letting out new flats contradicted their claim of needing space for their family.
The judgment emphasized the necessity for landlords to provide consistent and credible evidence of their need and the absence of alternative accommodations. The court ruled that the landlords' inconsistent pleas and actions undermined their claim of bona fide requirement, leading to the dismissal of their petition.
This ruling reiterates the stringent standards required under the Delhi Rent Control Act for landlords to successfully claim eviction based on bona fide residential needs, ensuring protection for tenants against arbitrary evictions.
Bottom Line:
Bona fide requirement under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 - Landlords must substantiate the need for eviction with consistent and credible evidence, including the absence of reasonably suitable alternative accommodation.
Statutory provision(s): Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, Section 14(1)(e), Section 14(1)(f), Section 14(1)(g), Section 25B.
Mohd Akhtar v. Abdul Rehan, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2838789
