SUNIL MULCHAND JAIN Vs. PURNIMA PRAKASH KULKARNI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the present matter is taken up for hearing and final disposal at the stage of admission itself. This Civil Revision Application takes . exception to the judgment and decree dated 07 th March 2011, passed by the learned District Judge, Dhule, in Civil Appeal No. 72 of 2009 and Judgment and decree dated 9 th May, 2009, passed by the learned Civil Judge Junior Division Dhule, in Regular Civil Suit NO. 431 of 2004.

(2.) It is the case of the revision applicant that, he was inducted as tenant by Shamrao Raghunathrao Kulkarni, the original landlord, father in law of the plaintiff No.1 and grand father of plaintiff Nos. 2 to 4. The revision applicant is running his business in the suit premises since 1985. It is the case of the revision applicant that, the agreed rent for tenancy was of Rs. 200/ per month. It was regularly paid by the revision applicant. The rent was regularly accepted by Shamrao Kulkarni, after his demise his son Prakash Kulkarni, husband of the applicant No.1 and thereafter, by plaintiff No.1.

(3.) On 9 th December, 2004, Regular Civil Suit N0. 431 of 2004 came to be filed before the Civil Judge Junior Division Dhule, by the respondents for eviction on the ground of willful default and for possession on the ground of bonafide requirement. It was contended that: