JUDGMENT - F.I. REBELLO, J.:---Rule. Heard forthwith.

2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner. The respondent/landlord had filed eviction suit against the petitioner on various grounds. The trial Court by judgment dated 11th January, 1999 dismissed the suit on all grounds.

3. Aggrieved, the respondent/landlord preferred an appeal. By judgment and order dated 29th January, 2002 the appeal was allowed, on the ground that the defendant has acquired suitable alternative accommodation as also on the ground that the defendant has kept the suit premises vacant for six months before the suit. I do not propose to consider the issue of keeping vacant the premises for six months before filing of the suit. The sole issue is, as to whether the tenant after creation of the tenancy and coming into force of the Act has built, acquired vacant possession of/or been allotted premises for residence. On behalf of the petitioner, their learned Counsel assailed the order of the Appellate Court on the following grounds :

4. It is firstly contended that acquisition of the alternative premises must have an element of voluntariness. In the instant case, it is contended that the petitioner had to shift t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document