MOHTA ANOOP V. , J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner is the landlord and respondent is the tenant. The premises consists of two rooms on ground floor in house bearing no. 636 situated at Kasba Peth, Pune. Both the Courts after considering the material, as well as, the evidence led by the parties, held in favour of the petitioner that the case of bonafide need, as sought, has been made out. However, the Additional District Judge, Pune, by the impugned judgment and order dated 29/8/ 1992, (Appellate Court) allowed the appeal filed by the respondent-tenant and dismissed the suit for possession of the petitioner on the sole ground of the greater hardship to the tenant, though confirmed the finding of bona fide need of the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner has invoked the provisions of Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

( 2 ) HEARD Mrs. Suhasini Mutalik, the learned Counsel, appearing for the petitioner. None appeared for the respondent, though served. The present petition was admitted on 26/7/1993, only on issue of "relative hardship".

( 3 ) THE petitioner-landlord, has deposed and, as accepted by the courts below that there are, 14 members in his family, which includes, wife,