956 of 2007 before the Rent Controller, Delhi under Section 14 1 a and b of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 in short the DRC Act on the ground that the premises in question, i.e., Shop No.
1 herein.
1 herein while setting aside Signature Not Verifiedthe judgments and orders dated 08.09.2011 and 24.03.2014 Digitally signed by SONALI SAUND Date 2017.08.30 passed by the Court of Additional Rent Controller, North Delhi 164829 IST Reason and the Rent Control Tribunal, Delhi, respectively.
The Rent Control Tribunal, vide judgment and order dated 24.03.2014 in RCT 203/2013/2011, dismissed the appeal.
Respondent No.
02/2009 dismissed the claim of eviction while directing the appellant herein to deposit the rent as agreed for preceding 3 three years from the date of filing of the eviction petition.
1 herein filed an application for increase of standard rent and eviction of tenant being Eviction Petition No.
IV, Dariba Kalan, Delhi 110 006 has been sub let, assigned and otherwise parted with possession illegally by the original tenant the appellant herein to his sub tenant Respondent No.
478 of 2014 before the High Court.
Being aggrieved by the order dated 08.09.2011, Respondent No.
15 , Gali Kunjas, Ward No.
1 went in appeal before the Rent Control Tribunal, Delhi.
1 herein, aggrieved by the judgments and orders dated 08.09.2011 and 24.03.2014, filed a petition being C.M. M No.
Learned Additional Rent Controller, North Delhi, vide judgment and order dated 08.09.2011 in E.No.
The owner Respondent No.
1 the original owner has placed on record two business cards which do number companytain the name of the appellant herein at all, showing the same address as that of the property in question in order to prove that Respondent No.
2 herein, who is in the unauthorized occupation of the same and is carrying on his own independent business and also that the original tenant the appellant herein is in arrears of rent from 01.01.2002.
16 Private No.
K. Agrawal, J. Leave granted.
Learned single Judge of the High Court, vide judgment and order dated 07.11.2014, allowed the petition filed by the owner Respondent No.
This appeal is directed against the final judgment and order dated 07.11.2014 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in C.M. M No.
478 of 2014 whereby learned single Judge of the High Court allowed the eviction petition filed by the original owner Respondent No.
Heard Mr. Braj K. Mishra, learned companynsel for the appellant tenant and Ms. Bharati Tyagi, learned companynsel for Respondent No.2 and Mr. Satish Kumar Jain the original owner, Respondent No.
Brief facts Shri Santosh Kumar Jain Respondent No.
Aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 07.11.2014, the appellant has preferred this appeal by way of special leave before this Court.
