1. The present petitions can be disposed of by a common judgment as the Petitioners are three tenants of the Respondent in three shops situated on the ground floor in the premises bearing No.C-19, Model Town, Part-III, Delhi. The Respondent filed similar eviction petitions against the Petitioners seeking eviction of the three shops one each with the Petitioners under Section 14 (1) (e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (in short „the DRC Act‟) wherein the leave to defend applications of the Petitioners were dismissed by similar order dated 25th April, 2013.
2. In the eviction petitions, the Respondent stated that she was the owner of three shops on the ground floor of premises No.C-19, Model Town, Part- III, front portion, park facing (in short „the tenanted premises‟). The shops were let out for non-residential purposes. The Respondent was married and her family comprises of herself, her husband, daughter and mother-in-law. The Respondent was running a boutique in the name and style of "Blossomz", F-14/18, Basement, Model Town, Part-II Delhi admeasuring approximately 273 sq.ft. which is owned by the Respondent. The Respondent has a workshop for the purpose of running a boutique at F-7/2, Model Town, behind Ganpati Market, Delhi where stitching of clothes is undertaken. The respondent was paying rent @Rs.20,000/- per month vide Agreement dated 1st June, 2011 and nine employees were working at the workshop. The total area of the workshop was 337 sq.feet. It was further stated that till April, 2011, the husband of the Petitioner was working as a distributor of STAR Den and Zee Turner channels to hotels, pubs, restaurants, farm house and hospitals etc. however, due to disputes his distributorship was terminated on 16th April, 2011 and thus thereafter her husband is also dependant on the Respondent. Due to loss of business of her husband the Respondent was the sole bread earner of the family and the boutique of the Respondent is the only source of income of the family of the Respondent. The mother-in-law of the Respondent suffered a brain stroke in August, 2011 and was admitted in Max Hospital, Saket whereafter she suffered a paralysis on the right side of her body. The mother-in-law of the Respondent is now fully dependant on the Respondent for every daily necessity and in the treatment of the mother-in-law all the savings of the family have been spent rather the Respondent had to take loan from friends. The Respondent has a 13 year old daughter who needs care and attention. Earlier the mother-in-law of the Respondent used to take care of the daughter however, after the mother-in-law suffered a brain stroke, the daughter is also dependant on the Respondent. Taking care of both the household and business it has become tough for the Respondent to pay attention to both the responsibilities and to balance the same. The Respondent thus wants to shift her boutique and workshop to the tenanted shops to save time, which would save her the rent of Rs.20,000/- as well. Further the boutique of the Respondent is in the basement and thus now and then Municipal Corporation of Delhi staff comes to the boutique and threatens to close the boutique as the same was not approved under the Master Plan. Thus the Respondent was under a continuous threat of sealing of her boutique and wants to shift the boutique and her workshop to the tenanted shops on the ground floor of the residential accommodation.