Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
AJOY KUMAR MUKHERJEE
Katyani Roy Chowdhury, since deceased, represented by Prativa Ghosh – Appellant
Versus
Chitta Ranjan Roy, since deceased, represented by Purnima Roy – Respondent
Judgment :
Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.
1. This Second Appeal has been preferred against judgment and decree of eviction of a premises tenant passed against the defendant/Appellant/tenant.The factual backdrop of the plaintiff’s case is that the original plaintiff Katyani Roy Choudhury filed Title Suit no. 495 of 1974 against the original defendant Chinta Horon Roy Choudhury (Predecessor of present Appellants) for recovery of khas possession and mesne profit. In the said suit filed in 1974, it was pleaded that plaintiff is an old aged ailing lady and plaintiff and her husband are unable to manage their own affairs and they need constant care and attention. It was further pleaded that beside the married daughter and son-in-law they have no other relations to be cared for but plaintiff fails to accommodate the said son-in-law and their family members and for which plaintiff reasonably require the suit premises and the garage. Learned Trial court while dealing with plaintiff’s case of reasonable requirement came to a finding that in any view of the matter the plaintiff’s reasonable requirement cannot be satisfied by partial eviction and accordingly decreed the suit as a whole directing the d
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the reasonable requirement of the landlord for the suit premises, including the accommodation of his married daughter and son-in-law, shoul....
The landlord's bona fide requirement for additional living space for a growing family takes precedence over a tenant's claim to a property used occasionally for health benefits.
The death of a landlord necessitates that a legal heir must establish their own bonafide requirement for premises independently, distinguishing it from the deceased's claims.
The judgment establishes the principles of bonafide requirement and comparative hardship in the context of eviction under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999.
Landlords must provide credible evidence of genuine and bona fide requirements for eviction; mere assertions are insufficient.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
