PANCHU LAL Vs. HEERA LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant-tenant has filed this second appeal assailing the decree for eviction passed on the ground of bona fide and reasonable necessity of the shop in question to the respondent- landlord. The shop in question situated at Mewadi Bazar, Beawar and in tenancy of the appellant-defendant prior to 1982.

(2.) The relevant facts, as culled out from the record, are that respondent-landlord led a civil suit for eviction in relation to rented shop way back on 24/1/1987 alleging bona fide necessity of himself and later on for his son-Ashok Kumar. Initially the suit was filed against the original tenant-Panchu Lal who contested the suit and filed his written statement. The trial court, recorded the evidence of both parties and find that the landlord is having bona fide and reasonable necessity of the rented shop. It was found that the landlord was not having any alternative shop. The trial court, after impleadment of Shri Milap Chand as legal representative of deceased-defendant tenant, continued the eviction proceedings. The trial court passed the eviction decree after appreciation of evidence of both parties on the issue of bona fide necessity of the shop in question. The first appellate court has affirmed the finding and upheld the eviction decree. Against concurrent findings of fact on the ground of bona fide and reasonable necessity of the rented shop to the respondent- landlord, the appellant tenant has filed this second appeal.

(3.) Since no interim stay order was passed in the present second appeal in favour of the appellant-tenant, therefore, the respondent-landlord proceeded with execution of eviction decree and the possession of rented shop has been taken by the respondent-landlord.