AMRUT VISHNU KESKAR Vs. BHASKAR TRIMBAK GOKHALE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS the original tenant's petition that question the reversing judgement rendered by the appeal Court by which a decree has been made for possession of the tenanted premises, holding that it has been estab lished that the tenant has acquired suitable accommodation and, therefore, the landlord was entitled to possession. The trial Court rejected this claim holding that it was not established that the defendant had acquired a suitable accommodation and was not using the tenanted premises for his residence. That finding has been reversed by the judgement under challenge.

(2.) A bare perusal of the evidence and the controversy between the parties go to show that the impugned judgement is unsustainable and a there is a clear error in assuming that the tenant had ceased to use the premises for his residence.

(3.) IT is indeed clear from the evidence on the landlord himself that the tenant has five sons and even of the date when the landlord was deposing, one of the sons of the defendant was very much in occupation of the tenanted premises. It is only because of old age and disability that the father had gone and residing in Sahakarnagr.