3-wp-4806-1993

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 4806 OF 1993

Rajaram Khondoji Gaikwad

..Petitioner

Vs.

Chagonabai Vishwanath Shinde & Ors.

..Respondents

----

Mr. Prathamesh B. Bhargude i/b. Mr. Sugandh B. Deshmukh & Mr.

A. V. Anturkar Senior Adv., for the Petitioner.

Mr. P. P. Kakade, for the Respondents.

----

CORAM : C.V. BHADANG, J.

RESERVED ON : 8^th FEBRUARY 2021

PRONOUNCED ON : 23^rd FEBRUARY 2021

P.C.

.

The challenge in this petition is to the judgment and decree

dated 5/10/1993 passed by the learned Additional District Judge at

Pune in Civil Appeal No.15/1990. By the impugned judgment, the

learned District Judge while dismissing the appeal filed by late

Rajaram Gaikwad (original defendant) has confirmed the judgment

and decree dated 21/10/1989 passed by the learned Small Causes

Court at Pune, thereby directing eviction of late Rajaram Gaikwad,

from the suit premises.

Mamta Kale page 1 of 12

3-wp-4806-1993

2.

The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the petition may

be stated thus-

That late Chagonabai Shinde (original plaintiff) filed Suit

No.2151/1986 against Rajaram Gaikwad (since deceased) for

eviction and possession on the ground of default in the matter of

payment of rent, reasonable and bonafide requirement, nuisance

and on the ground that the tenant had made permanent

construction in the tenanted premises. The parties herein are the

legal representatives of the original plaintiff and the defendant. For

the sake of convenience, they are referred to in their original

capacity as plaintiff and defendant.

3.

The suit premises consist of one room admeasuring 7 x 16 feet

on the ground floor standing on CTS No.1857, Sadashiv Peth, Pune,

more particularly described in para 1 of the plaint.

4.

The suit property originally belonged to one Vasant Pote and

others. Plaintiff purchased the suit property Benami, in the name of

her sister Harinabai on 23/6/1971 and subsequently, the property

was recorded in the name of the plaintiff on 13/11/1979. The case

made out in the plaint is that the defendant was occupying the suit

premises as a tenant on monthly rent of Rs.10/- exclusive of taxes.

Mamta Kale page 2 of 12

3-wp-4806-1993

The tenancy was as per the English Calender month. It was the

material case that the defendant had not paid the rent from

23/6/1971 either to the plaintiff or Harinabai and thus the

defendant was in arrears of rent of Rs.755/- plus taxes and has

become a willful defaulter. It was next contended that the family of

the plaintiff consists of eight members and she was in possession of

only two rooms which are insufficient. It was contended that the

elder son of the plaintiff was married and her two daughters were

also residing with her and the younger son was of a marriageable

age. It was thus contended that the plaintiff reasonably and

bonafide requires the suit premises for her occupation. It was

contended that the defendant has acquired five blocks at Vadgaon

Sheri and another premises at Kalewadi, Pimpri and was residing

there. It was thus contended that the defendant was not in need of

the suit premises. It was also contended that the defendant had

constructed a bath room and attick of wooden material in the suit

premises without prior permission of the plaintiff. It was also

contended that the defendant used to keep water tap open and there

were other acts attributed to him including of creating ruckus in a

drunken condition which was a nuisance. On all such grounds, the

eviction of the defendant was sought.

Mamta Kale page 3 of 12

3-wp-4806-1993

5.

The defendant resisted the suit. It was deni