Vineet Kothari, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition has been filed by the petitioner -tenant Ghanshyam being aggrieved by the order dt. 21.04.2012 passed by the learned Appellate Rent Tribunal, Jodhpur in Civil Rent Appeal No. 80/2008 -Ghanshyam vs. Srikrishna Bhati whereby the learned lower appellate Rent Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the petitioner -tenant Ghanshyam and affirmed the judgment and eviction decree dt. 23.7.2008 passed by the learned Rent Tribunal, Jodhpur in Rent Petition No. 232/2005 - Sri Krishna Bhati vs. Ghanshyam whereby the learned Rent Tribunal had allowed the application of the respondent -landlord for eviction on the ground of bonafide necessity of the respondent -landlord in respect of suit shop situated at Ward No. 54, New Army, Family Quarters, Ajmer Road, Jodhpur. By concurrent decrees of eviction, the learned Tribunals below had allowed the application for eviction filed by the landlord -respondent in respect of suit shop. The need claimed by the respondent landlord Sri Kishan Bhati was for his two sons Manish Bhati and Prashant Bhati.
(2.) BOTH the Tribunals below have found that the respondent -landlord had bonafide need for the suit shop in question and therefore, directed eviction under the provisions of Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001. The learned counsel for the petitioner -tenant Mr. Sudheer Sharma submitted that the respondent -landlord did not have bonafide need inasmuch as the landlord has given another shop on rent to another tenant and if the landlord was in need of the suit shop, he would not have given the other vacant shop on rent to a third party.
(3.) HAVING heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and upon perusal the record of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present writ petition filed by the petitioner -tenant has no force. The finding of bonafide need of the landlord is a finding of fact.;