HC notes ‘egregious misuse’ of Delhi Rent Control Act, says ‘well-off tenants…unjustly occupy premises paying pittance for rent’
The Delhi High Court was hearing a case related to petitions filed challenging the additional rent controller’s order against evicting tenants from a property in Sadar Bazar.
3 min readNew DelhiUpdated: Jul 3, 2025 01:48 AM IST
Justice Anup Bhambhani recorded that “the financial well-being of a landlord, or the financial ill-health of a tenant, are not relevant considerations while deciding an eviction petition" (Archive)
The Delhi High Court observed on Wednesday that the Delhi Rent Control (DRC) Act, 1958, is an “egregious misuse of an anachronistic piece of legislation”, where well-off tenants “unjustly” occupy premises paying a pittance as rent, while the landlords are forced into “impecunious and desperate circumstances”.
The HC was dealing with petitions challenging the 2013 orders by the additional rent controller (ARC) that had dismissed eviction petitions by the UK- and Dubai-based owners of a property in Sadar Bazar, ruling in favour of the tenants.
The petitioners had sought eviction of the premises on the ground that they run two restaurants in London and bona fide require the subject premises for expanding the business in India.
The ARC, while ruling against the petitioners, had recorded that they are settled-in and are running their businesses in London and Dubai, and did not require the premises for their “subsistence or survival”; and therefore, their bona fide requirement did not amount to being an “actual need”. The ARC had also reasoned that the premises were too small to run a sit-in restaurant from.
Justice Anup Bhambhani, setting aside the ARC’s orders, recorded that “the financial well-being of a landlord, or the financial ill-health of a tenant, are not relevant considerations while deciding an eviction petition under section 14(1)(e) of the DRC Act”.
The court further recorded that the ARC’s view that the petitioners’ need is not bona fide “is wholly uncalled for and illegal”.
“…whether they are able to run a full-fledged, sit-down restaurant or a smaller food take-away vend is entirely the petitioners’ prerogative; and the bona-fides of their requirement cannot be discounted based merely on the learned ARC’s assessment of whether a food business can be run from the subject premises. This view taken by the learned ARC is flawed…,” Justice Bhambhani observed.
Story continues below this ad
Allowing the petitioners to evict the tenants, Justice Bhambhani noted, “This court is compelled to record that while manning the Rent Control Roster, it has found… cases abound where very well-off tenants enjoying financial prosperity persist in unjustly occupying premises for decades on-end, paying pittance for rent, while in the process, their landlords are forced into impecunious and desperate circumstances, resulting from egregious misuse of an anachronistic piece of legislation, namely the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958.”
Sohini Ghosh is a Senior Correspondent at The Indian Express. Previously based in Ahmedabad covering Gujarat, she recently moved to the New Delhi bureau, where she primarily covers legal developments at the Delhi High Court
Professional Profile
Background: An alumna of the Asian College of Journalism (ACJ), she previously worked with ET NOW before joining The Indian Express.
Core Beats: Her reporting is currently centered on the Delhi High Court, with a focus on high-profile constitutional disputes, disputes over intellectual property, criminal and civil cases, issues of human rights and regulatory law (especially in the areas of technology and healthcare).
Earlier Specialty: In Gujarat, she was known for her rigorous coverage in the beats of crime, law and policy, and social justice issues, including the 2002 riot cases, 2008 serial bomb blast case, 2016 flogging of Dalits in Una, among others.
She has extensively covered health in the state, including being part of the team that revealed the segregation of wards at the state’s largest government hospital on lines of faith in April 2020.
With Ahmedabad being a UNESCO heritage city, she has widely covered urban development and heritage issues, including the redevelopment of the Sabarmati Ashram
Recent Notable Articles (Late 2025)
Her recent reporting from the Delhi High Court covers major political, constitutional, corporate, and public-interest legal battles:
High-Profile Case Coverage
She has extensively covered the various legal battles - including for compensation under the aegis of North East Delhi Riots Claims Commission - pertaining to the 2020 northeast Delhi riots, as well as 1984 anti-Sikh riots.
She has also led coverage at the intersection of technology and governance, and its impact on the citizenry, from, and beyond courtrooms — such as the government’s stakeholder consultations for framing AI-Deepfake policy.
Signature Style
Sohini is recognized for her sustained reporting from courtrooms and beyond. She specialises in breaking down dense legal arguments to make legalese accessible for readers. Her transition from Gujarat to Delhi has seen her expand her coverage on regulatory, corporate and intellectual property law, while maintaining a strong commitment to human rights and lacuna in the criminal justice system.
X (Twitter): @thanda_ghosh ... Read More
