Sunita Agarwal, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Manzarul Islam, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Nitin Yasharth, learned counsel for the respondents.
(2.) The release application has been filed with regard to the suit premises for commercial purposes. The challenge to the orders of release passed by the Courts below is on the ground that the premises cannot be released for commercial purpose as it was a purely residential accommodation. The landlord has admitted the fact that the tenant is occupying and using the accommodation in question for residential purposes.
(3.) Both the Courts below have recorded a finding that the tenant has failed to establish that the accommodation in question is a residential accommodation as it lacks basic amenities of Kitchen, latrine and bathroom. The accommodation in question is one room in the front portion of the house which is of mixed use both commercial as well as residential. The tenant is doing business of sale of bangles from the disputed accommodation. Merely because they have started living in the disputed accommodation which was initially let out for the business purpose, it cannot be said that the dominant use of the tenented accommodation is residential.;