Dilbagh Singh Suri v. Naut Ram & ORS

$~42 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RC. REV. 345/2018 & CM 29578/2018 DILBAGH SINGH SURI .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. M.A.Khan, Advocate versus NAUT RAM & ORS.

.....Respondents Through:

Nemo

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

O R D E R

% 03.10.2018 C.M.29579/2018 (Exemption) Allowed subject to all just exceptions.

RC. REV. 345/2018 & CM 29578/2018 Impugned order of 9th April, 2018, directs petitioner to vacate the subject premises while holding that the rooms already got vacated by respondents-Owners are not sufficient for the accommodation of respondents' family, which comprises of 20 members. Eviction of petitioner has been ordered on the ground of bonafide requirement. Learned counsel for petitioner assails the impugned order on the ground that opportunity to lead evidence was not granted to petitioner and the rooms already got vacated by the respondents are sufficient to accommodate the family of the respondents.

Upon hearing, I find that the plea of denial of opportunity to petitioner to lead evidence is not taken in the revision petition and that the RC. REV. 345/2018

accommodation already got vacated by respondents is sufficient for their residence, is not acceptable, as family of respondents comprises of 20 members.

Finding no illegality in the impugned order, this petition is dismissed. However, petitioner is granted four weeks' time from today to vacate the subject premises.

With aforesaid directions, this petition and the application are disposed of.

(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE OCTOBER 03, 2018 v RC. REV. 345/2018