R.K.MANISANA SINGH
Haren Barua – Appellant
Versus
Lalit Bhuyan – Respondent
2. The plaintiff-landlord instituted the suit against the defendant-tenant on the ground that the tenant is a defaulter and the suit premises are bonafide required by the landlord urgently for his own use and occupation by renovating the same as the whole of the house is severely damaged and is a dilapidated one.
3. The trial Court decreed the suit holding that the tenant is a defaulter, and that the suit premises are bona fide required by the landlord. The lower appellate Court has held that the tenant is not a defaulter. As regards the bona fide requirement for personal use, the appellate Court has also decided against the landlord by holding that the defendant-tenant is not liable to be evicted on the- ground of personal occupation of the landlord. However, the lower appellate Court has held that the tenant is liable to be evicted as the suit premises are required for reconstruction after demolishing the existing one. Hence this petition.
4. In para 3 of the plaint it
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.