SALIG RAM Vs. SAGAR CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a Civil Second Appeal by the landlord whose suit has been dismissed by the first appellate Court. The plaintiff-landlord filed a suit for eviction of the defendant-tenant on the ground of bonafide and reasonable necessity. Although the specific requirement was not specified in the plaint, but in the course of evidence it was claimed that the plaintiff who was a qualified doctor would start a dispensary in the disputed shop after retirement.

(2.) THE trial Court decreed the suit, but it was dismissed by the first appellate Court holding that the plaintiff has failed to prove bonafide and reasonable necessity.

(3.) THE first appellate Court was also of the opinion that the plaintiff having become unsuccessful in the earlier eviction suit, which was based on the ground of material alteration, has filed this suit within three months of the dismissal of the earlier suit.