LEELA ANANDRAM KARNAVAT Vs. A T SITARAMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a landlady's petition challenging the concurrent findings of fact recorded by both the Courts below under the Bombay Rent Act.

(2.) THE petitioner-landlady filed Civil Suit No.842/1990 mainly on two grounds - (1) that the defendant No.1-tenant had secured alternate accommodation and (2) that he has sublet the premises to defendant No.2. The defendants came out with the case that the suit premises, which are residential premises, were initially let out to the father of the defendants by the predecessor-in-title of the landlady-petitioner. They claimed that in the year 1968 their father died and therefore all his family members became tenants who were residing there. Defendant No.2 is the real younger brother of defendant No.1. Both the Courts below have, after appreciating the material on record, held that it is an admitted position that presently the suit premises are occupied by defendant No.2 who is the real younger brother of defendant No.1.

(3.) IN the result, the petition fails and is dismissed. The Rule is discharged with no order as to costs. Certified copy expedited.