TIKAM CHAND Vs. HARBANS LAL (RAJASTHAN)(JAIPUR BENCH)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for eviction in respect of rented shop in the lower court, which was dismissed. However, on an appeal filed on behalf of the plaintiff, the learned first appellate court decreed the suit of the plaintiff on the ground of personal bona-fide necessity.

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellant has argued that there was no threatening in the present case for vacation of shop which is occupied by the plaintiff as a tenant, therefore the necessity of shop assessed by the first appellate court cannot be said to be bona-fide, and the judgment and decree passed by the first appellate court is liable to be set aside. Whereas, the learned counsel for the plaintiff-respondent has supported the judgment of the first appellate court.