FIZABI SHARAFALI BADASHAH Vs. MOHAN TARACHAND ATHAWANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned advocates for the parties. Perused the records.

(2.) THE petitioner challenges the concurrent findings arrived at by the Courts below for dismissal of the suit for eviction of the respondent, which was filed by the petitioner on various grounds including the ground of bonafide need of the premises for business purposes of the petitioner's sons, material alterations and additions in the suit premises and nuisance to the occupants of the suit premises.

(3.) UPON hearing the learned advocates for the parties, and on perusal of the records, it is seen that the trial Court, on detailed analysis of the evidence on record, has come to the clear finding of fact that the petitioner had already sought eviction of two other tenants in Civil Suits Nos. 399 of 1981 and 1276 of 1982 and in both the suits, she had obtained favourable decree for eviction of the said tenants. Considering the same, the court has observed that the petitioner does not require the suit premises for her personal use and occupation as she is already having bigger premises consequent to the decrees passed in the aforesaid two suits. It was sought to be contended that the said decrees were challenged by the tenants, however, there is nothing on record to show that the said decree have been challenged by the tenants. The finding of the trial court has not been disturbed by the lower appellate Court in that regard.