KAMALA SHIVCHARAN KHAIRKAR Vs. CHANDRABHAGABAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri. Bandre, learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri. Sathe, learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) The challenge is to the order of Rent Controller dated 7-6-1993 granting permission to present respondents to terminate tenancy of petitioners under clause 13 (3) (vi) of C. P. and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as Rent Control Order). The said order of Rent Controller was challenged by the petitioners in appeal under clause 21 of Rent Control Order and the appellate authority has on 22-2-2001 dismissed that appeal.

(3.) The premises in question are about 90 sq. ft. and located at Abhyankar Nagar Road in Dhantoli area. The premises appear to be a structure which is being used for running a Saloon shop by petitioner No. 2 - Jaiwant. The premises were let out to father of petitioner No. 2 by name Shri. Shivcharan by husband of Respondent No. 1 and father of respondent No. 2 - Durjan. The said Durjan initiated proceedings and sought permission under clause 13 (3) (vi) , (ix) and (iv) of Rent Control Order, to terminate the tenancy of petitioners. He contended that he was working in a Mill and after retirement, he wanted to start Cycle Repairing Shop and his grand son by name Dilip would assist him. The said application was opposed by present petitioners. During the pendency of these proceedings, Durjan died and therefore his widow i. e. present Respondent No. 1 and his only daughter i. e. present respondent No. 2 were substituted on record as his legal heirs. They have prosecuted the matter further. As already stated above, Rent Controller granted permission only under clause 13 (3) (vi) of Rent Control Order i. e. for bonafide need and it is maintained by the appellate authority.