1. Eviction proceeding under Section 21(1)(b) of the U.P. Act — Landlord's son seeking to establish a private clinic after resigning from government service. (Para 1 )
Back
Next 
1994 Supreme(SC) 14
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
BEFORE S. MOHAN AND M.K. MUKHERJEE, JJ.
VINAY KUMAR AND OTHERS
Versus
DISTT. JUDGE, GHAZIPUR AND OTHERS
Civil Appeal No. 2963 of 1986
Decided on 5-1-1994
Important Points
The court held that a landlord's son currently in government service can establish a bona fide need for premises to start a private clinic if he demonstrates a clear intention to resign from government service to pursue that purpose.
Subject
Eviction - Bona Fide Need
Act Referred
Headnote
Appeal dismissed
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Whether a person currently in government service can have a bona fide need to occupy premises for a private clinic upon resignation. (Para 2 )
3. A government employee's intention to resign from service to establish a private clinic, evidenced by affidavit, constitutes a valid basis for bona fide need. (Para 2 )
4. Intention to resign from government service to start a private practice can support a finding of bona fide need for premises. (Para 2 )
5. Civil appeal dismissed; eviction order affirmed. (Para 2 )
6. Can a government employee claim bona fide need for premises to start a private clinic?
Yes, if the employee demonstrates a clear intention to resign from government service to establish the private clinic, such as through an affidavit on record. (Para 2 )
7. Does an affidavit expressing the intent to resign from government service suffice to show bona fide need?
Yes, the court accepted the affidavit offering resignation as evidence of the intention to start a private clinic, thereby supporting the bona fide need. (Para 2 )
ORDER
1. The application of the respondent under Section 21(1)(b) of the U.P. Act was allowed by the trial court. On appeal one of the contentions was whether the son of the landlord was in government service as a doctor and yet whether he desired to set up a private clinic after resigning the government service. To this the tenant had filed a counter. This affidavit was taken on file and on that basis the order of eviction was affirmed. The writ petition filed before the High Court by the tenant also suffered the same fate.
2. The only point urged before us in this civil appeal is that the son of the respondent/landlord is in government service and, therefore, he cannot have any bona fide need to start his private clinic. We are unable to agree. He has offered to resign through the affidavit that is on the record to show his intention to start a private clinic. There are no merits in this civil appeal which is dismissed. No costs.
For Citation: 1995 Supp(2) SCC 586
