- (1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners aggrieved against judgment and recovery certificate dated 03.08.2013 passed by Rent Tribunal, Bikaner and the judgment dated 16.07.2014 passed by Appellate Rent Tribunal, Bikaner, whereby, the recovery certificate for possession of the suit shop has been granted by the Rent Tribunal and the appeal preferred by the petitioners has been rejected.
(2.) The respondent No. 3 filed an application under Section 9 of the Rent Control Act, 2001 ('the Act') seeking eviction of the petitioners from the suit premises on the ground of reasonable and bona fide requirement of the premises; it was, inter alia, claimed that the applicant had no issue; earlier Naresh was taken in adoption, who died; the applicant along with his wife reside on the first floor above the suit shop; the shop was quite big, the applicant was aged 81 years and his wife was 76 years old, the applicant is a heart patient and his wife is suffering from Asthma; the applicant and his wife have been advised by the doctor against climbing of stairs and to reside on the ground floor and if applicant and his wife climb the staircase, the same may be fatal for them; the applicant has become quite old and has pain in his knees and and has difficulty in climbing to the first floor and on climbing he along with his wife suffer breathing problems; the applicant for himself and his wife wants to get the premises vacated and reside there after constructing rooms and the premises were required for reasonable and bona fide requirement of applicant himself and his wife.
(3.) The application was resisted by the petitioners by filing reply; it was, inter alia, submitted that the applicant along with his wife does not reside at the first floor above the suit premises, in fact they reside at house situated at Rani Bazar on the ground floor; the applicant along with his wife was living at Rani Bazar for several years; in the proceedings between the parties at High Court, applicant gave out his address as Rani Bazar; it was claimed that behind the disputed shop there were several rooms lying vacant, in which, there was a big paul (gate); the age alongwith ailment of the applicant and his wife were denied; the applicant has only indicated his desire and there is no need; the portion at the back of the shop was fit for residence; the shop let out to Satyam Bhujiya Bhandar has been vacated and is in possession of the applicant; suit was filed for personal necessity by the applicant in the year 1977, which was rejected, the applicant was harassing the defendants since 1977 and is not in need of the shop; the allegations about the applicant being old and pain in his knees were denied and it was suggested that the applicant can take medicine from the counsel for the defendants for the same; the allegation that the applicant and his wife reside at Rani Bazar on the ground floor were reiterated; it was submitted that the shop is situated in a crowded area and if the applicant's wife has breathing problem she cannot reside at the said place; the entire area was business related; there were two shops lying vacant near the suit premises, which can be utilized for residence.;