Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Mahendra Kumar Alias Buddi Lal vs Mahendra Kumar Godha Thr Lrs on 23 March, 2022
Author: Sudesh Bansal
Bench: Sudesh Bansal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 715/2017
Mahendra Kumar Alias Buddi Lal Adopted S/o Late Shri Sitaram,
R/o D-14, Goverdhanpuri, Galta Gate, Jaipur Rajasthan.
----Appellant
Versus
1. Mahendra Kumar Godha S/o Late Shri Chandmal Godha,
Since Deceased
1/1. Smt. Tata Devi W/o Late Shri Mahendra Kumar Godha,
R/o House No. 572, Thakur Pachewar Ka Rasta, Chokari
Ghatgate, Jaipur.
1/2. Virendra S/o Late Shri Mahendra Kumar Godha, R/o
House No. 572, Thakur Pachewar Ka Rasta, Chokari
Ghatgate, Jaipur.
1/3. Satyendra S/o Late Shri Mahendra Kumar Godha, R/o
House No. 572, Thakur Pachewar Ka Rasta, Chokari
Ghatgate, Jaipur.
1/4. Sajnay S/o Late Shri Mahendra Kumar Godha, R/o House
No. 572, Thakur Pachewar Ka Rasta, Chokari Ghatgate,
Jaipur.
1/5. Alka D/o Late Shri Mahendra Kumar Godha, R/o House
No. 572, Thakur Pachewar Ka Rasta, Chokari Ghatgate,
Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Manish Sharma
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL
Order
23/03/2022
Appellant-defendant, by way of this second appeal has assailed the judgment and decree dated 10.03.2010 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jaipur in suit No.590/94 whereby suit for eviction was decreed on the ground of bonafide and reasonable (Downloaded on 24/12/2022 at 04:52:21 PM) (2 of 2) [CSA-715/2017] necessity of respondent landlord for his son in relation to shop in question. Apart from passing the decree on the ground of bonafide and reasonable necessity, the trial Court has also passed the decree on the ground of non-user. The eviction decree dated 10.03.2010 passed by the trial Court, has been affirmed by first Appellate Court vide judgment dated 23.08.2017.
In the present second appeal, question is about the issue of bonafide and reasonable necessity and non-user. The Supreme Court in case of Ram Prasad Rajak Vs. Nand Kumar & Bors. & Ors. [(1998) 6 SCC 748] has held that issue in relation to bonafide requirement of rented premises by landlord is essentially a question of fact and does not involve any substantial question of law. Similarly, the issue in relation to non-user of premises is also essentially based on facts and requires re-appreciation of evidence.
Once, two Courts below have appreciated evidence and concurrently held that there is bonafide and reasonable need of respondent landlord for rented shop and moreover passed the decree on the ground of non-user, this Court is not inclined to entertain the second appeal. No substantial questions of law are involved in this appeal.
Accordingly, the second appeal is dismissed. However, the appellant-tenant is granted three months time to vacate the rented premises.
All pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of.
(SUDESH BANSAL),J NITIN /7 (Downloaded on 24/12/2022 at 04:52:21 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)