VINAYAK POMA TARKAR Vs. JACINTO SANTA GORGENIO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is challenging by this writ filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution the judgment of the Administrative Tribunal dated 13-6-1991 which has unsettled the judgment of the Addl. Rent Controller dated 26-2-1986 whereby he rejected with costs the respondent No. 1s (hereinafter called the respondent) application seeking for the recovery of possession of the suit house on the ground of bona fide personal requirement.

(2.) IT was the case of the respondent that the property called "galoum" situated at Mapusa and consisting of a residential house had been rented to the petitioner by his late father sometime in the year 1953. On his death the same was inherited in co-ownership by him and his three brothers who, by Deed dated 26-3-1976 effected the partition of the estate of their father and as a result whereof the suit house was allotted to him and to his brother Leonardo. Subsequently Leonardo gifted his rights to the house in favour of the respondent by Deed dated 31-3-1976 and as such the petitioner became since then the absolute owner of the house.

(3.) IN his application for eviction the respondent expressly set out that he was employed in a gainful occupation in the Arabian Gulf while his wife and children were living in Bombay in a tenanted place at Malad. Whenever he used to come to Goa during holidays at least once a year, the petitioner has no other house of his own to stay either at Mapusa or at any other place in Goa and has to live along with his family at his in-laws place at St. Cruz. The respondents wife and children desire now to settle in Goa and did not want to reside any more in Bombay. He, therefore, pleaded that genuinely and bona fidely required the house not only for his residence whenever he comes to Goa but also for its permanent occupation by his wife and children who wanted to shift from Bombay for good and live in Goa.