V.K. Shali, J. - (1.) This is a revision petition filed by the petitioners against the order dated 19.05.2015 passed by the learned Additional Rent Controller, (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in an Eviction Petition No.E-101/13 titled Amar Preet Singh Chadha & Anr. v. Smt. Saroj Bala Sapra & Ors. by virtue of which the leave to defend application of the petitioners-tenants has been rejected and an order of eviction was passed.
(2.) Briefly, stated the facts of the case are that the respondents-landlords are claiming themselves to be the owner of property bearing No.18-B/3, Desh Bandhu Gupta Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. It is stated that the respondents are presently residing in Dubai on account of the hotel business being run by respondent No.1. Respondent No.2 is the mother of respondent No.1 and it is stated that despite respondent No.1 doing business in Dubai, he continues to hold Indian Passport and he has roots in India. The elder daughter of respondent No.1 is pursuing studies in Delhi and younger one is also interested in pursuing her higher education in Delhi. So far as the respondent No.2 is concerned, she is stated to be an old lady of 80 years and thus a senior citizen who intends to spend her evening of life in India. It is stated that the respondents-landlords have no alternative suitable accommodation available to them except the suit premises and as and when they come to India they face lots of difficulties in putting at the residence in Punjabi Bagh, a house which belongs to the sister of respondent No.1 and daughter of respondent No.2. Accordingly, it is stated that the respondents are requiring the suit premises for their bona fide requirement and since the premises are stated to be in a bad shape, the respondents have stated that after seeking eviction of the present petitioners, they intend to demolish the old structure and construct a new according to the present standard.
(3.) There were five tenants in the petition. Petitioners Nos. 4 and 5 made a statement on 28.11.2013 that they have no concern with the suit property and accordingly they were deleted from the array of parties. While as leave to defend filed by petitioners No.1 to 3 only was considered. They have taken the plea that the respondents-landlords do not have real intention of shifting to India as a matter of fact, the entire purpose of seeking eviction of the present petitioners was to demolish the property and sell it or use it alternatively as a hotel after reconstruction. The purpose of doing this exercise of converting the premises into a hotel was stated to be actuated with an intention to make money because the property prices had increased. They had also challenged the intention of the respondents-landlords to live in the suit premises as it was stated to be very small property. The house bearing No.19-A, Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi which was a residential house where they were putting up as and when they were in India, was stated to be an alternative accommodation apart from this 6/85, WEA, Karol Bagh, Delhi where hotel was being run.;