MOHAMMAD MOIZUDDIN SIDDIQUI Vs. MOHAMMAD ISMAIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners herein are the tenants and they seek to challenge the orders of eviction from the suit premises of which the respondent is the landlord, who initiated the proceedings mainly on the grounds of wilful default and bona fide personal requirement.

(2.) Initially, the Rent Controller dismissed the eviction petition rejecting both the grounds. However, on appeal by the landlord, the eviction was ordered accepting the ground of bona fide personal requirement and rejecting the ground of wilful default. Thus, though the ground of wilful default was rejected by both the Courts below, there is no challenge by the landlord on this count. Hence, in this revision, the only question remains to be considered is whether on the facts and circumstances the landlord is entitled to seek eviction on the ground of bona fide personal requirement.

(3.) There is no dispute as to jural relationship of landlord and tenant. The tenanted premises is a non-residential and commercial shop on a monthly rent of Rs.200/- per month, which was let out in pursuance of rental agreement dated 1-6-1982. The case of the landlord is that he himself is running a kirana shop in a rented mulgi at Shalibanda and his landlord asked him to vacate, as willingness was obtained from him by the Quli Qutubshah Urban Development Authority to acquire for the purpose of road widening. Hence, he requires the suit premises for his own business. The petitioners countenanced these allegations by total denial and stating that the ground is invented for the purpose of eviction. However, in view of threat of dispossession, they had to file a suit in O.S.No.2423 of 1991 for permanent injunction.