KHEMCHAND KALIDAS MEHTA Vs. KOTHARI GABHARUCHAND MOTILAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner who is the original defendant-tenant has impugned the ejectment decree passed against him by filing this revision under Sec. 29(2) of the Bombay Rent Act.

(2.) The respondent is the original plaintiff-landlord who is the owner of one residential house bearing No. E/6/155 situated in Galeseth Street at Radhanpur. The plaintiff was the owner of half portion of the said house and later on he purchased the other half from one Mr. K. H. Shah by registered sale deed on 13-2-1975 with sitting tenant, i.e., petitioner. For the sake of convenience and brevity, the parties are hereinafter referred to as the landlord and tenant.

(3.) The demise property consisted of a room wherein defendant is the tenant at a monthly rent of Rs. 9.00. After the purchase of the property, the landlord served the defendant-tenant with a notice calling upon him to hand over the possession of the demise property. The claim of the possession was disputed by the tenant by giving reply. Thereafter, the landlord filed regular Civil Suit No. 60 of 1976 in the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.) at Radhanpur for the recovery of possession of the demise property on three grounds, viz., arrears of rent for more than six months, personal bona fide and reasonable requirement and non-user of the demise property. The defendant-tenant resisted the suit by filing written statement Ex. 10, He, inter alia, contended that he had gone to Bombay in search of employment and his family is staying in the demise premises and that he used to come to Radhanpur frequently. He disputed all the grounds for eviction. On appreciation of the facts and circumstances the trial Court decreed the suit for possession on the ground of personal requirement and non-user of the demise premises. The trial Court refused to pass decree on the ground of arrears of rent. The tenant carried the matter before the District Court by filing Regular Civil Appeal No. 54 of 1978. The appellate Court partly allowed the appeal. The decree for possession came to be confirmed on the ground of non-user of the demise premises. Therefore, the tenant has challenged the legality and validity of eviction decree by filing this revision under Sec. 29(2) of the Bombay Rent Act.