JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent.
(2.) Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the present case was remanded back by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court to the Rent Appellate Tribunal with the directions to give
finding with regard to bonafide need and eviction.
(3.) Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the finding regarding his bonafide need is wholly perverse once the
court reached to the conclusion that there is another property
available with the petitioner. Merely by saying that petitioner-
tenant cannot dictate terms to the landlord for living as well as
conducting business, finding has been given, whereas the Hon'ble
Supreme Court specifically directed the appellate court to give
finding regarding bonafide need. The word "bonafide" has its own
connotation and meaning. The bonafide has to be examined with
respect to all the circumstantial aspects. However, it is submitted
that the court has not considered all the aspects.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.