Bona fide residential need under rent control fails where a landlord ignores available suitable accommodation and re-lets it.

Eviction under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act depends on a bona fide residential need and the continued absence of other reasonably suitable accommodation. Subsequent events may be considered when deciding whether that condition still exists at the final stage. Here, after the proceedings began, a vacant portion of the premises became available to the landlord, but she chose to re-let it rather than occupy it. That conduct undermined her claim of non-availability of suitable accommodation, so the statutory condition for eviction was not satisfied and eviction was refused.

---

---

Issues: Whether the landlord was entitled to eviction under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 when, during the pendency of the proceedings, another portion of the premises became available but was not occupied by the landlord and was instead re-let.

Analysis: The statutory conditions for eviction under Section 14(1)(e) require both a bona fide need for residence and the absence of any other reasonably suitable residential accommodation. The requirement must continue to exist when the matter is finally decided, and relevant subsequent events may be taken into account. Here, the landlord had an opportunity to occupy the vacant portion of the premises after the eviction proceedings began, but chose to let it out for higher rent. That conduct was material in assessing whether she still lacked other reasonably suitable accommodation. Rent control legislation is protective, but it does not permit a landlord to retain residential premises for eviction while consciously opting for a more profitable commercial use of available space.

Conclusion: The landlord was disentitled to eviction because, on the relevant subsequent events, she could not establish that she had no other reasonably suitable residential accommodation. The appeal succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: In eviction proceedings based on bona fide residential requirement, subsequent events relevant to the existence of alternative suitable accommodation must be considered, and a landlord who deliberately declines available suitable accommodation cannot satisfy the statutory condition of non-availability of such accommodation.

---