SHRIKISHAN SHIVNARAYAN TOSHNIWAL SINCE DECEASED PER L RS SMT KASTURBAI SHRI Vs. BABURAO EKNATH SIRSATH AND AMBABAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this Revision Petition the tenant is challenging the order passed by the Rent Controller, Jalna in Case No. 83/rc/cr-43 and order passed by the learned District Judge, Jalna in Rent Appeal No. 10/88 whereby the order of eviction which was passed by the Rent Controller came to be confirmed. During the pendency of this revision application, original tenant died and his heirs are brought on record and they are prosecuting the proceedings in this Court.

(2.) THE facts falls in very short compass. The tenant was occupying the premises being House No. 3-21-61 at Gandhi Chowk, Old Jalna, where he is running a Kirana shop. Admittedly the premises belonging to the respondent-landlord. The parties to the proceedings will be referred as the landlord and the tenant. It is the case of the landlord that the tenant is occupying the suit premises which consist of three rooms on monthly rent of Rs. 43/ -. The landlord approached the Rent Controller, Jalna by filing an application U/s 15 of the Hyderabad Houses (Rent, Eviction and Lease) Control Act, 1954 on the ground that his family consist of 17 members, his four sons are married and they are educated unemployed and they have to start business and as there is no other accommodation, which will be used for the purpose of accommodation and for setting up business by his sons, the landlord claimed possession of the suit premises on the ground of personal bonafide requirement. The tenancy came to be terminated by the notice dated l. 8. 1983.

(3.) ON receipt of the summons from the Rent Controller,jalna, the tenant appeared and contested the claim by filing a written statement. The tenant refuted the allegations made by the landlord and he denied that the landlord has any bonafide need to occupy the premises. It is contended that the landlord desires to seek eviction of the tenant for the residential purpose. As the premises are used for non-residential purpose, the same cannot be used for residential purpose. With these averments the tenant prayed for dismissal of the said application.