JAYANTILAL WILLIAMBHAI Vs. BHARUCH TEXTILE MILLS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of the present petition under Section 29(2) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 the original appellant tenant has challenged the judgement and decree dated 15.11.2006 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bharuch in Regular Civil Suit No. 355 of 1990, which has been confirmed by the 4th Additional District Judge, Bharuch in Regular Civil Appeal No. 3 of 2007 by passing judgement and order dated 22.6.2012, whereby the decree passed by the Trial Court under Section 13(1)(f) of the Rent Act is confirmed by the Appellate Court by evicting the petitioner.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are as under:

(3.) AFTER considering the deposition of the witnesses and the evidence on record, the Trial Court decreed the suit on the ground that since the property was found on the rental basis by the mill to the petitioner defendant as its employee and since the petitioner defendant had retired from the services, the plaintiff textile mill is entitled for a decree of eviction under Section 13(1)(f) of the Rent Act. It was also held that the plaintiff textile mill was bonafidely in need of the disputed property and also held that the plaintiff mill would suffer hardships and inconvenience, if the possession is not handed over to the plaintiff. The judgement and decree dated 15.11.2006 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge came to be challenged by the present petitioner by way of Regular Civil Appeal No. 3 of 2007 in the Court of learned 4th Additional District Judge, Bharuch. After considering the record of the case and judgement passed by the Trial Court, the learned Additional District Judge, by order dated 22.6.2012, partly allowed the appeal and set aside the decree passed on the ground of bonafide requirements and hardships and confirmed the judgement and decree passed on the ground of service tenancy i.e. under Section 13(1)(f) of the Act. Hence, this Revision Application.