SUKHADEO KRISHNARAO GHATODE Vs. LAXMIBAI DATTARAYA MOHORIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is landlord of premises situate at house No. 253, Ward No. 40 in Amravati, in a locality known as Khaparde Bagicha. He purchased this property on the 3rd Oct., 1970 and followed; it up by filing this application before the Rent Controller requesting for permission to serve upon the tenant Laxmibhai a notice to quit. The ground made out by him in his application is that he has been living in a rented house in Budhwara Amravati. That he wanted more accommodation and wanted his own house for his residence and convenience. Be therefore, purchased the suit house which he needs bona fide for his residence. These were the bare averments made in the application.

(2.) The application was resisted by the tenant. According to the tenant, the landlord does not bona fide reed these premises for his occupation and residence. He has been in the habit of purchasing properties and selling them. That he had purchased a house in Aurangapura in about 1968 and sold it in March 1970. That in addition he has plots at other places. In short, the case of the tenant was that the landlord was dealing in real property, buying and selling at profit being his business. She seems to suggest that if the tenant is evicted the landlord owner would naturally be able to make more money by sale than otherwise.

(3.) The parties led evidence before the Rent Controller. The landlord examined himself and one Damodhar. On behalf of the tenant her son was examined. The Rent Controller came to the conclusion that the landlord has succeeded in proving his bona fide need. He, therefore, granted a permission to serve a quit notice under clause 13(3) (vi) of the Central Provinces and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the Rent Control Order).