FORM ‘A’ OF RULES UNDER DELHI RENT CONTROL ACT, 1958

BEFORE THE HON’BLE RENT CONTROLLER: (WEST DISTRICT)

TIS HAZARI COURTS COMPLEX: DELHI

EVICTION PETITION NO. OF 2021

APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 14(1)(e) AND SECTION 25-B OF DELHI

RENT CONTROL ACT, 1958

1. Municipal No. of the premises and C-37-A, Hari Nagar, Clock

name, if any. Tower, New Delhi-110064
2. Street and Municipal Ward or C-37-A, Hari Nagar, Clock
division in which premises of the Tower, New Delhi-110064
premises are situated.
3(a) Name and address of the landlord. Smt. Sarla Devi Jain (since
expired is being represented
through her legal
representatives i.e. the
husband and two daughters
namely Sh. Nem Chand
Jain, Veena Jain and
Monika Jain respectively.)
(b) Name and address of the Sh. Vipin Kumar Jain, S/O
tenant/tenants. Sh. Sukhbir Jain, R/O C-
39, 1st Floor, Hari Nagar,
Clock Tower, New Delhi-
110064.
4. Whether the premises are Non-residential
residential or non-residential. (commercial)
5. In the case of residential premises, The tenanted premises let
the number of person occupying out on 01.04.1986 by the
 the same and in the case of non- petitioner to respondent is a
residential premises, the purpose shop situated on Ground
for which these are used and the floor forming part of the
number of employees, if any, property bearing no. C-37-
working therein. A, Hari Nagar, Clock Tower,
New Delhi-110064 more
specifically shown RED
COLOUR in the site plan
attached.
6. Whether any furniture is supplied No.
by the landlord.
7. Details of fittings if any, provided Electrical fittings were
by the landlord. provided in the tenanted
shop by the petitioner.
8. Details of accommodation The tenanted shop situated
available together with particular at Ground floor forming
as regards ground area garden and part of property no. C-37-A,
out house if any, (plan to be Hari Nagar, Clock Tower,
attached). New Delhi-110064, which is
more specifically shown in
RED COLOUR in the site
plan attached has been let
out by the petitioner to the
respondent.
9. Whether any premises are being The tenanted shop is in the
occupied by a single tenant or by possession of the
more than one tenant. respondent and the
respondent is not using the
shop and deliberately
depriving the petitioners of
their property despite being
fully aware of the bonafide
and genuine needs of the
petitioners. It is imperative
to state here that the
respondent has not been
using the property since the
 beginning of the suit.
10. Amenities available are regard to Electricity facilities are
lighting water sanitation and the available in the tenanted
like. shop.
11. Monthly rent together with details The demise premises was
or houses tax, electricity, water let out by the Petitioner to
and other charges paid by the the respondent on
tenant. 01.03.1986 at monthly rent
of Rs.300/- besides other
charges and subsequently
the rent was increased from
time to time and presently
the rate of rent is Rs.
1065/- per month,
excluding other charges.
12(a Date of completion of construction As per records.
) of the premises and the cost
thereof.
(b) Whether completion report was As per records.
obtained from the local authority
and the date thereof.
13. Rateable value as entered in the As per municipal records.
last property assessment book of
Delhi Municipal Corporation, New
Delhi Municipal Committee or the
Delhi Cantonment Board as the
case maybe.
14. Date on which the premises were The tenanted shop was let
let to the tenant and details of out on 01.03.1986 under an
agreement, if any, with the oral agreement to the
landlord attested copy of the respondent by the
agreement to be attached. petitioner.
15. Whether the rent of the premises No.
has been fixed under the New
Delhi House Rent Control Order,
1939, or The Delhi Rent Control
Ordinance 1944, or the Delhi and
Ajmer, Marwara Rent Control Act,
 1947, or the Delhi Rent Control
Act,1958 & if so, the amount of
such rent and the date from which
it took effect.
16. Whether there are any sub-tenants No.
and if so, the date of such sub-
letting accommodation sub-let,
whether with or without the
written consent of the landlord
and the rent charged from the
sub-tenant.
17. Whether any addition or alteration No.
have been made since the rent was
fixed as stated under item No.15,
and if so, the date on which such
addition or alteration or whether
they were carried out with the
approval of the tenant or of the
Controller.
18(a The ground on which the eviction of the tenant is sought.
)
i. That, the petitioners are the owners and landlords of the

commercial shop (hereinafter referred as the shop) bearing

no. C37-A, Hari Nagar, Clock Tower, New Delhi,110064

which was purchased by the deceased Smt. Sarla Devi and

became the owner of the property by virtue of GPA dated

, deed of agreement dated 29.07.1974 and receipts of

payments of sale consideration dated as 29.07.1974. The

said documents were executed between Late Smt. Sarla

Devi and the erstwhile owner of the property- C37-A, Hari

Nagar, Clock Tower, New Delhi-110064 (suit property).

True and correct copy of the GPA, deed of agreement and

receipts of payments of sale consideration are collectively

 annexed herewith as ANNEXURE A (COLLY).

ii. That, vide the above said documents, Late Smt. Sarla Devi

became the sole and exclusive owner of the said property

bearing no. C37-A, Hari Nagar, Clock Tower, New Delhi-

110064 and as she died intestate, she left behind the legal

heirs i.e. A husband and two daughters. True and correct

copy of the death certificate of Late Smt. Sarla Devi is

annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-B.

iii. That, the respondent is tenant under the petitioners under

an oral agreement in respect of the commercial shop

situated at Ground Floor forming part of property bearing

no. C37-A, Hari Nagar, Clock Tower, New Delhi-110064

(shown in red colour specifically in the site plan) between

Late Smt. Sarla Devi and Sh. Vipin Kumar Jain in the year

1987 at a monthly rent of Rs. 300/- per month.

iv. That, the property bearing no. C37-A, Hari Nagar, Clock

Tower, New Delhi-110064 consists of two shops and a

small store at ground floor, two rooms, kitchen, toilet and

bath room situated on the first floor. One of the shops

along with the shop is under the tenancy of Smt. Monika

Jain and is running the business under the name of

Arihant Medicos, who is one of the legal heirs, on monthly

rent of Rs.7000/month excluding other charges while the

other shop is under the tenancy of the respondent. True

 and correct copy of the site plan of the said property is

annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-C.

v. That, one of the petitioners i.e the father is an aged man

who is paralysed with no source of income and is solely

dependent upon the income of rent. The medical expenses

of the father could not be covered solely from the rent

received from the tenants. True and correct copy of the

medical certificate is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-D.

vi. That, the other petitioner, elder daughter of Late Smt.

Sarla Devi is a housewife whose husband has recently

died leaving behind 3 grown children, all of them studying

and the burden of running the house has fallen upon her

with her having no source of income. She is aged about 50

years with no years of experience and therefore would not

be able to get a job anywhere easily at this age. True and

correct copy of the death certificate of Sh. Dharmendra

Jain (husband of elder daughter) is annexed herewith as

ANNEXURE-E.

vii. That, it is further pertinent to mention herein that apart

from the monthly rent from the tenanted premises, the

petitioners have no meagre source of income and the

youngest son of the petitioner 1 who had just completed

his law is burdened with the financial responsibility of the

family, comprising of two unwed daughters and a son of

the petitioner no 1.
viii. That, the deceased husband of the petitioner took a house

loan of Rs. 70 Lakhs and a car loan of Rs. 4 Lakhs which

has now been burdened upon the petitioner to repay. True

and correct copy of the loan papers is collectively annexed

herewith as ANNEXURE–F (COLLY).

ix. That, the petitioner has to save some amount for the

marriages of her children who all are studying currently

and has to manage all their fees for the colleges and also

have to look after the ailing father and his medical

expenses.

x. That, admittedly, the respondent is also having another

shop bearing no.3 DDA Market, CB Block, Hari Nagar,

Ghanta Ghar, New Delhi, in the name of his wife, from the

said property, the respondent is getting Rs. 25000/- per

month as rent.

xi. That, the respondent is deliberately depriving the plaintiffs

of their property despite being fully aware of the bona fide

and genuine needs of the plaintiffs. It is imperative to state

here that the respondent has not been using the said

property since 2015 and in fact further has kept it locked

and not been used at all by the respondent since ------

True and correct copy of the unused shop is annexed

herewith as ANNEXURE-G.
xii. That, the petitioners in order to survive and fulfil their

basic necessities, require the shop in question for

commercial purposes to be used and occupied by them as

they do not have any other commercial property for the

purpose.

xiii. That, it is yet again reiterated that since she has been a

housewife and has no experience in the commercial

business at all and only suitable business for her today is

to open a general store in order to contribute to the

expenses of the family as the income presently being

earned by the family, the petitioner no.1 is so meagre to

deprive them off the basic necessities of life. The tentative

monthly expenditure of the family would be approximately

_______. The petitioner states that monthly a sum of

_______ is being spent of groceries, _______ on electricity,

_____ on water supply, _____ on education fees, _________

-----____--- whereas the income is a sum of_________.

xiv. That, as it is evident from the expenditure incurred by the

household from the petitioner no.1 is more than the

income and the petitioner no.1 has to in fact keep taking

financial assistance from one relative or another. In this

case, the attention of the Hon’ble court is drawn to the fact

that the fees of the younger daughter of the petitioner no.1

for the year______ was borne by the petitioner no.2. True

and correct copy of the RTGS entry of Rs.________ from the

account of petitioner no.2 to _______ is annexed herewith

 as ANNEXURE-

xv. That, from the above, it is manifestly apparent that the

suit premises is required by the petitioner no.1 as a bona

fide requirement and much more than that as the same is

now a source of livelihood of the petitioner and her

dependants. The petitioner no.1 is required to open a

general store from the suit property, which is as

mentioned above, which is already locked from the

year_______ and by running a general store from the suit

property, the petitioner would be in a position to help her

family to overcome the financial constraints and hardships

faced by them. It is therefore imperative in the interest of

justice that the suit property which is anyway not being

used by the respondent be handed over to the petitioners.

xvi. That, from the conduct of the respondent, it is apparent

that the suit property is not required by him to run his

business or earn his livelihood rather he is bent upon in

harassing the petitioners only for his sadistic pleasure.

Furthermore, the non-requirement of the suit property by

the respondent is also evident from the fact that when

entire nation was in lockdown due to coronavirus, almost

every chemist shop was open and running in order to

supply essentials and even during that time the suit

property from which medical shop was running, was not

required by the respondent for any purpose and by

retaining the possession of the suit property, the

 respondent’s sole aim is to harass the petitioners as

already mentioned above.

xvii. That, an impugned order was passed by the Ld. Judge

against the petitioners thereby thrashing the eviction

petition filed by the petitioner on the grounds of bona fide

requirements in year 2019.

xviii. That, the petitioner has no other reasonably suitable

premises except the tenanted shop in question i.e. shop

situated at Ground Floor forming part of property bearing

No. C37-A, Hari Nagar, Clock Tower, New Delhi-110064.

xix. That, being aggrieved by the impugned order passed by

the Ld. Judge dated 08.11.2019, the petitioner is filing this

fresh eviction petition since the respondent is not vacating

the tenancy premises despite repeated requests and

demands and knowing the genuine needs of the petitioners

and therefore, this petition.

(b) Whether notice required has been No notice is required.

given and if so, particulars thereof
(copies of such notice and tenant’s
reply if any should be furnished.)
19. Any other relevant information. No.
20. Relief Claimed It is therefore, prayed that
the Hon’ble court may be
pleased to allow the present
petition passing an order of
 eviction against the
respondent in respect to the
premises no. C-37-A, Hari
Nagar, Clock Tower, New
Delhi-110064 shown in
RED COLOUR in the site
plan attached.

Pass any order or direction

as this Hon’ble Court may
deem fit and proper in the
facts and circumstances of
the case.

PETITIONERS

THROUGH:

MANISHA PARMAR AND ASSOCIATES

ADVOCATES FOR THE PETITIONERS

101, LGF, NEW RAJDHANI ENCLAVE,

VIKAS MARG, NEW DELHI

NEW DELHI E: [email protected]

DATED: 14.02.2020 M: 9999699762/ 9899585301

VERIFICATION:

I/We the above-named Petitioners/Applicants have recognized agent

do hereby verify that the contents of Paragraph No.1 to 19 of my/our

above petition are true to my/our knowledge and last para is prayer

to the Hon’ble Court.

Verified at Delhi on this of 2021.

PETITIONERS
 BEFORE THE HON’BLE RENT CONTROLLER: WEST DISTRICT: TIZ
HAZARI COURTS COMPLEX, DELHI

EVICTION PETITION NO. OF 2021

In the matter of:

Smt. Sarla Devi Jain …

PETITIONER

VS

Sh. Vipin Kumar Jain …

RESPONDENT

AFFIDAVIT

I,