RAJU D.L.JOHN Vs. RAMESH ARJUNRAO SONKUSARE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Randive, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Paunikar, learned counsel for the respondent.

(2.) The petition questions the judgment and decree dtd. 2/5/2017 passed by the learned Small Causes Court, granting a decree for eviction under Sec. 16(1)(g) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act against the petitioner. The appellate Court by the judgment dtd. 4/4/2022 has dismissed the appeal.

(3.) It is contended by Mr. Randive, learned counsel for the petitioner that during the pendency of the suit, the petitioner was prevented from leading evidence on account of his employment at Andaman and Nicobar Island for a period of around 4 to 6 months and therefore, he could not bring the relevant material on record, to disprove the bonafide need claimed by the respondent/landlord in respect of the suit premises. It is therefore contended by him that the matter needs to be remanded back to the learned trial Court for affording an opportunity to the petitioner/tenant. It is submitted that such a plea raised before the appellate Court has been negatived. It is also contended that the respondent/ landlord has also his house at Lal Imali, Gandibagh Nagpur, which is in his occupation and therefore, there is absence of any need.