KHATIJABAI UMAR ABDUL KARIM Vs. ZARINABEGAM CHIRAGDIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition arises out of suit filed by the present petitioner who is the landlady in respect of the suit premises, for recovery of possession of the suit premises from the respondent defendant, a helpless lady whose husband has deserted her, on the ground of the landladys bona fide requirement.

(2.) ADMITTEDLY, the suit premises are on the ground floor of the building to the petitioner-plaintiff. It was purchased by her in the year 1959. The respondent was already in occupation of the ground floor of the building as tenant of the erstwhile landlord. After the purchase of the building by the present petitioner, she become the respondents landlady. There is no dispute that right from the beginning when the petitioner became the owner of the building in question, quarrels and disputes have been going on between the parties. Earlier a suit was filed for recovery of possession of the suit premises from the respondent on the ground of unlawful sub letting. As stated by the lower appellate Bench, there existed even criminal litigations between the parties. It was only after the earlier suit, filed on the ground of unlawful sub-letting was dismissed by the Court that the present suit was filed for recovery of possession of 3/4th portion of the suit premises on the ground of the petitioner-landladys bona fide requirement.

(3.) DURING the trial, the landlady herself did not step into the witness box to depose to the nature of her bona fide requirement. On her behalf her husband give evidence. The trial Court had decreed the suit to the extent of about 1/2 portion of the suit premises by demarcating the portion which was to be handed over by the respondent into the possession of the present petitioner.