- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
(2.) The appellant is aggrieved against the concurrent findings recorded by the two courts below in the judgments and decrees dated 2.1.1997 and 25.8.2005.
(3.) Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff/landlord filed suit for eviction of his tenant/defendant on the ground that the suit premises is required for personal bonafide need of his son Om Prakash who want to start photography business in the suit shop. The plaintiff produced one more witness Yashwant Lal in addition to giving his own statement and his son's statement. The defendant no.1 also produced five witnesses.;