MOHANLAL Vs. NAVALKISHOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since both these writ petitions are directed against the judgment dated 12/02/2013 passed by the Appellate Court in proceedings for eviction, they are being decided by this common judgment.

(2.) Rule. Heard finally with consent of learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner in W.P.No.1072 of 2014 is the owner of a two storied house on Nazul Plot No.10Sheet No.119B, Mouza Paratwada, out of which two rooms on the ground floor have been let out to the respondent as tenant. The respondent is running his medical shop in said premises. According to the petitioner, the respondent was liable to pay monthly rent of Rs.500/ per month along with municipal taxes. It is the further case of the petitioner that he was running a shop on the southern portion of the building and said accommodation was falling short and hence there was a bonafide need of the tenanted premises for expanding his business. It was also the petitioner's case that he was a heart patient and hence was advised to shift on the ground floor of the premises. Therefore, the need for residence. Hence, notice dated 06/01/2003 came to be issued to the respondent seeking arrears of municipal taxes and as the same were not paid, proceedings for eviction were filed.

(3.) The respondent filed his written statement in which it has stated that he was not liable to pay municipal taxes as there was no such agreement between the parties. According to him, the petitioner had other premises available and suit had been filed merely to evict the respondent from the premises. He also referred to the fact that the plaintiff was owning a double storied shopping complex in which some shops were lying vacant.