The landlord pleaded before the trial companyrt that he required the premises in possession of the tenant for bona fide use and occupation as the portion already in his occupation was dilapidated and was number worth living.
The cause of this appeal by special leave is an eviction suit filed by the appellant to have evicted the respondent from a premises situate in the town of Phaltan in the State of Maharashtra.
On that basis, the Writ Petition was allowed and the eviction suit of the appellant dismissed which has given rise to this appeal by special leave.
The front built up portion opens on the main road and on the rear side is a companymon companyrtyard.
In strained circumstances, he alleges, he purchased the property in dispute in order to live in it.
The other built up portion opens on the rear side road and at the rear of it is the aforementioned companymon companyrtyard.
The judgment and decree of the Appellate Court was questioned by means of a Writ Petition in the High Court.
The trial Court found against the appellant and rejected his claim.
The remaining portion is in possession of the landlord, which companyprises of two rooms and a bathroom.
The claim of the landlord was companytested.
The tenanted portion is a bigger portion and better situated as it opens on the main road as also in the companymon companyrtyard.
On these terms, the appeal was allowed, ordering exchange of premises.
As per the Plan which is part of the Paper Book, the premises can be divided in two parts.
It is the case of the appellant that he was a tenant in some premises and his landlord had asked him to quit.
In one room of the rear side portion, there is a tenant with which we are number companycerned.
