New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has upheld an order to evict a tenant from a property, saying a person cannot be deprived of his right to livelihood and live with dignity merely on the grounds of old age and weak health. A landlord needs it to run his business.
The High Court rejected the tenant's stand that considering the landlord's age and health, it was not credible that he would carry on any business from the premises which was sought to be vacated.
The High Court dismissed a tenant's plea challenging the order of the Additional Rent Controller (ARC), which had passed the eviction order.
“The genuineness of the requirement set out by the landlord cannot be thrown into doubt on such speculative arguments.Merely because the landlord is suffering from old age and weak health, it cannot be assumed that he does not require the rented premises to run his business or earn livelihood, Justice Girish Kathpalia said while upholding the ARC order. is not able.
The High Court said there was nothing on record to show that the landlord was bedridden or that his son, engaged in independent business, was taking care of him financially.
The High Court said, "Merely because of old age and weak health, a person cannot be deprived of the right to livelihood and consequently the right to live with dignity."
The landlord, claiming to be the owner of a shop in Paharganj area, has filed a petition in the trial court seeking eviction of the tenant on the ground that he now needs the premises to run his business as he has the proper is not a suitable place. Alternative accommodation.
The landlord said that earlier he had to close his business, which was being run in a residential area, and he was allotted a plot in Bawana by the authorities, but he had given it up due to the long distance and his old age.The court said that the plot had been surrendered long ago and it was not available to the landlord to be used as a shop.
"The surrender of the Bawana plot by the present defendant (landlord) was due to the long distance between Bawana and the place of residence of the present defendant. But this cannot be construed to mean that he is unable to earn his livelihood through business .Subject premises,” it said.
The High Court rejected the tenant's stand that considering the landlord's age and health, it was not credible that he would carry on any business from the premises which was sought to be vacated.
The High Court dismissed a tenant's plea challenging the order of the Additional Rent Controller (ARC), which had passed the eviction order.
“The genuineness of the requirement set out by the landlord cannot be thrown into doubt on such speculative arguments.Merely because the landlord is suffering from old age and weak health, it cannot be assumed that he does not require the rented premises to run his business or earn livelihood, Justice Girish Kathpalia said while upholding the ARC order. is not able.
The High Court said there was nothing on record to show that the landlord was bedridden or that his son, engaged in independent business, was taking care of him financially.
The High Court said, "Merely because of old age and weak health, a person cannot be deprived of the right to livelihood and consequently the right to live with dignity."
The landlord, claiming to be the owner of a shop in Paharganj area, has filed a petition in the trial court seeking eviction of the tenant on the ground that he now needs the premises to run his business as he has the proper is not a suitable place. Alternative accommodation.
The landlord said that earlier he had to close his business, which was being run in a residential area, and he was allotted a plot in Bawana by the authorities, but he had given it up due to the long distance and his old age.The court said that the plot had been surrendered long ago and it was not available to the landlord to be used as a shop.
"The surrender of the Bawana plot by the present defendant (landlord) was due to the long distance between Bawana and the place of residence of the present defendant. But this cannot be construed to mean that he is unable to earn his livelihood through business .Subject premises,” it said.
