Dismissed
Avtar Singh Bhatia v. Ashok Sapra
Delhi HCRC.REV./375/2025
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RC.REV.…
What the court decided
AI extract
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~12
AVTAR SINGH BHATIA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, Mr. Kunal Sachdeva, Mr. Balwinder Singh Suri, Ms. Katyayni V., Mr. Nishant Walia & Mr. Lakshay Yadav, Advs.
versus
ASHOK SAPRA .....Respondent Through: Ms. Aroshi Pal, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA
Act, 1958 seeks the following prayers:-
“a. Pass orders calling for the entire records of the petition filed under Section 14(1)(e) r/w Section 25B of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, bearing the title Ashok Sapra vs. Avtar Singh Bhatia bearing number RC ARC 376/23 decided by the Learned Additional Rent Controller–01, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi; and,
b. Set aside the Impugned Order dated 13.06.2025, whereby the Learned Additional Rent Controller–01, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi, rejected the leave to defend application filed by the Revisionist and consequently granted an eviction order under Section 14(1)(e) read with Section 25B of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, in favour of the Respondent concerning the rented premises, being the commercial unit bearing No. XIII-5124, Harphool Singh Building, Clock Tower,
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/02/2026 at 12:51:55
Subzi Mandi, Delhi – 110007, India; and,
c. Hear the present petition and decide based on the facts and circumstances brought forth; and,
d. Pass any other order as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”
“18. Ergo , in view of the aforesaid analysis, this Court finds no reason for interfering with the well-reasoned and detailed findings arrived by the learned ARC in the impugned order, which, thus is liable to be upheld.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/02/2026 at 12:51:55
same rate at which the rent was agreed to be paid.”
AMIT SHARMA, J
FEBRUARY 16, 2026/ nk/sg
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/02/2026 at 12:51:55
1 provisions across 1 enactments
AVTAR SINGH BHATIA
ASHOK SAPRA
AMIT SHARMA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court