VELABAI Vs. HIRABEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present revision application has been filed under sec. 29(2) of the Bombay Rent Act r/w sec. 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(2.) THE facts of the case, briefly stated, are that the original plaintiffs-landlords preferred H.R.P. Suit No. 4832/82 before the Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad for possession on various grounds including the ground of sec. 12(3)(a) as well as sec. 13(1)(k) regarding non-user. THE Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad, vide judgment and order dated 30.1.1989 decreed the suit on appreciation of evidence and defendant No. 1-petitioner herein was directed to hand over possession. Regular Civil Appeal No. 51/89 came to be preferred before the Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court by the petitioner herein, original defendant No. 1 (tenant). THE said appeal came to be disposed of by the Appellate Bench of the Small Cause Court vide judgment and order dated 15.7.1997 confirming the order passed by the trial court observing that the petitioner, original defendant No. 1 had not used the premises for more than six months immediately preceding the date of filing of the suit without any reasonable cause and the evidence has been found to that effect. It is also observed that there is no reason to disturb the findings given by the trial Judge in respect of sec. 13(1)(k) of the Bombay Rent Act and there is a discussion based on the evidence with regard to other aspects which have been confirmed by the Appellate Bench.

(3.) IT is well-accepted that the scope of exercise of revisional jurisdiction is very limited. The concurrent findings arrived at by both the courts below cannot be said to be perverse or illegal resulting in any kind of irregularity or miscarriage of justice and therefore the present revision application deserves to be rejected and accordingly stands rejected. Rule is discharged with no order as to costs. Interim relief stands vacated.