* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ RC.REV. 341/2014 & CM 17396/2014 (stay)
% Decided on: 8th January, 2015
VED PRAKASH ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Rajat Aneja, Mr. Vijay Kasana,
Advs.
versus
SURAJ SAXENA & ORS ..... Respondent
Through Mr. Puneet Goel, Adv.
Coram:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
MUKTA GUPTA, J. (ORAL)
CM 17395/2014 Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. CAVEAT 929/2014 Counsel as above appears for the respondent/ caveator, hence caveat is discharged.
RC.REV. 341/2014 & CM 17396/2014 (stay)
1. Aggrieved by the order dated 1st July, 2014 passed by the learned Rent Controller allowing the eviction petition filed by the respondent Smt. Suraj Mukhi the petitioner prefers the present petition. Smt. Suraj Mukhi, wife of late Gopi Chand had filed an eviction petition No.E-74/2011 before the Rent Controller seeking eviction of the petitioner from the premises situated at plot No.209, P.O. Block Krishna Nagar, Delhi i.e. two rooms and one store RC.REV. 341/2014 Page 1 of 8 room on the ground floor which had been let out for residential purposes but converted to commercial purpose. During the pendency of eviction petition Smt. Suraj Mukhi passed away and thus the respondents who are her legal heirs were impleaded as parties.
2. The respondents in the eviction petition plead that they have a large family, thus requiring at least 21 rooms and one garage, therefore s