PRAFULKUMAR DAMAJI GALA Vs. NARAYAN GOVIND GAVATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a tenant's petition assailing the judgment and order dated 11th August, 1999 of the learned Additional District Judge, Thane whereby the civil appeal of the respondentlandlord against the judgment and order dated 15th October 1996 in Regular Civil Suit No.218 of 1993 passed by the Joint Civil Judge (Senior Division), Thane, dismissing the respondents' suit stands set aside. By the impugned judgment, the respondents' eviction suit is partly decreed interalia directing to the petitioner to deliver to the respondent vacant possession of the "back side suit residential premises".

(2.) In nutshell the facts are : The respondent Narayan Govind Gavate (since deceased) was the owner of the chawl situated at Survey No.365/52 known as Gavate Chawl situated at Vithawa Taluka and District Thane, which is within the limits of Thane Municipal Corporation. In this chawl, a tenement consisting of three rooms was let out to the petitioner in the year 1976 (for short "the suit premises"). The total area of these three rooms/suit premises was 300 sq.ft. The suit premises were let out to the petitioner for the purpose of business and residence. In the front room, the petitioner was undertaking business of a grocery shop, while in the rear two rooms as averred in the plaint, the petitioner was residing with his family members. Respondents 1(a) to 1(d) are the legal heirs and representatives of Narayan. For convenience the legal heirs who represent the landlord are referred as "the respondent".

(3.) There is something which is very peculiar about this tenancy, which the respondentlandlord has subsequently ratified. The respondent has averred in the plaint that at the inception of the tenancy, the petitioner was minor and his father had taken the suit premises on rent in the name of his minor son. Since inception of the tenancy, the suit premises were used for conducting grocery shop in the front room and the rear two rooms were used for residence. The father of the petitioner was managing the said business. However, on the petitioner becoming a major, he is accepted as a tenant by the respondentlandlord.