TUKARAM KHUSHABA CHORGE Vs. MALAM JANARDHAN JAGTAP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE legal representatives of tenant-original defendant have filed the present Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning the Judgment and decree passed by the 8th Additional District Judge, Pune on 30th January, 1996 whereby the said Appeal Court set aside the Judgment and Decree passed by the Trial Court and decreed the landlady s suit for eviction on the ground of reasonable and bona fide need.

(2.) MR. S. G. Page, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners assailed the findings of fact recorded by the appeal Court on the questions of reasonable and bona fide necessity and comparative hardship on the ground that the trial Court upon appreciation of evidence having reached the findings that the landlady has not been able to establish reasonable and bona fide necessity and, that in case the decree for eviction was passed in favour of the landlady greater hardship would be caused to the tenant, there was no justification for the Appeal Court to interfere with the findings recorded by the Trial Court. He accordingly supported the reasons given by the Trial Court in its judgment and urged that the findings recorded by the Appeal court deserve to be set aside. He also urged that even if the findings recorded by the Appeal Court on the question of reasonable and bona fide necessity and comparative hardship are maintained, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court should only pass decree for eviction in respect of part of premises.

(3.) THERE is absolutely no merit in any of the contentions raised by the Learned Counsel for the petitioners and Writ Petition deserves to be dismissed which i dismiss for the reasons I indicate hereinafter.