SHRIDHAR DATTATRAYA KARADKAR Vs. NARAYAN LAXMAN SOPARKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Application has been filed under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 seeking to quash and set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 30th July 2011 passed by the Small Causes Court, Bombay in R.A.E. and R. Suit No.1251/1887 of 2006 as well as the judgment and order dated 20th Jan. 2015 passed by the Appellate Bench, Small Causes Court, in Appeal No.91 of 2011. The Trial Court in its impugned judgment and order decreed the eviction Suit filed by the Respondent herein (original Plaintiff) on the ground of nonuser (section 16(1)(n) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999) (for short, the said Act) as well as on the ground of bona fide requirement (section 16(1)(g) of the Act). Being aggrieved by this order of the Trial Court, the Applicant herein filed an Appeal which also came to be dismissed by the Appellate Bench on 20th Jan. 2015. It is in these circumstances that the Applicant is before me in my revisional jurisdiction under section 115 of the CPC. For the sake of convenience, I shall refer to the parties as they were arrayed before the Trial Court.

(2.) The brief facts giving rise to the present controversy are that the Plaintiff is one of the legal heirs of deceased Laxman Soparkar, who was the original landlord of "Narayan Ashram", Varachi Aali, situated at Plot No.1176, 'M' Ward, Chembur Gaothan, Mumbai 400071 (hereinafter referred to as the said building). The Defendant is a tenant of the Plaintiff in respect of Room No.1, admeasuring approximately 120 sq.ft. in the said building (for short, the suit premises).

(3.) The suit premises was let to the Defendant for residential purposes as a monthly tenant of Rs. 60.00 rent. According to the Plaintiff, since the Defendant had acquired suitable residential premises during the month of Dec. 1985 and since he and his family members were residing in these alternate premises, the Plaintiff and his brothers filed R.A.E. Suit No.642 of 1987 in the Court of Small Causes, Mumbai. That Suit came to be filed inter alia on the ground of bona fide requirement as well as nonuser. The issues that were framed in the Suit were as follows :- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_76_LAWS(BOM)6_2017.htm</FRM>