VRAJLAL DWARKADAS Vs. GIRDHARLAL KALIDAS DHRUVE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. The respondent-party-in-person waives service of rule. With the consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing today.

(2.) The petitioner is the original defendant, against whom a suit for eviction was filed by the respondent-original plaintiff, being Regular Civil Suit No.56 of 1983. The respondent-original plaintiff is the owner of a house situated in Khambhalia Town. The defendant was given the aforesaid premises as a tenant at a monthly rent of Rs.150.00. The aforesaid suit was filed for getting a decree for possession on the ground that the defendant had not paid the rent for more than six months and on the ground of arrears of rent, he is required to be evicted. The other ground pleaded in the suit is regarding bona fide requirement of the plaintiff. The decree for eviction is also sought for on the ground that the defendant, after obtaining the possession of the rented premises, has acquired alternative accommodation, which is a suitable alternative accommodation, and, on the aforesaid ground of acquisition of alternative accommodation also, the decree for possession is sought.

(3.) The trial court, after framing necessary issues and after recording the evidence of the parties, ultimately, came to the conclusion that the plaintiff has failed to prove the case about non-payment of rent, as well as he has failed to prove his case regarding bona fide requirement of the house. Regarding acquisition of alternative accommodation, the trial court found that it cannot be said that, on the date of filing of the suit, the defendant acquired alternative accommodation. The trial court also observed that, looking to the size of the family of the defendant, it cannot be said that the alternative accommodation is adequate for accommodating the defendant's family. The trial court, ultimately, dismissed the said suit.