AHMED SHARIF KASAMBHAI VORAH Vs. CHANNUSA DAGADUSA PAWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties.

(2.) The respondents filed suit for eviction against deceased Ahmed Sharif on ground of bonafide personal requirement. The tenement is a small shop in which deceased ahemed Sharif used to run a bicycle taxi shop. The landlord-respondent no. 1 expressed need for the suit shop for business of his grandsons who were taking education. The suit was dismissed by the trial Court. The appellate court reappreciated the evidence and reversed findings of the trial court. The appellate court held that the respondents have proved their personal bonafide need and would be put to greater hardship than the deceased tenant if the eviction decree will be refused. The suit, therefore, came to be decreed. Hence, this petition.

(3.) The original defendant-Ahemed sharif demised after the appellate Court's judgment and prior to filing of this petition. The petitioners are his legal representatives. They impugn the Judgment of the appellate court on the ground that its findings are perverse.