IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION 8305 OF 2018 Abdul Gani s/o. Sheikh Hasam, aged about 81 yrs, Occ. Retired, r/o. Kazi Nagar, Bhandara, Tahsil & District Bhandara (Near Dargah) ...PETITIONER ...V E R S U S...

1. Dilip Gopaldas Duwani, aged about 48 yrs, Occ. Business, r/o. Ganpati Metal Works, Main Road, Jamnalal Bajaj Ward, Bhandara, Tahsil & District Bhandara 2. Abdul Nabi s/o. Sheikh Hasam, aged about 70 yrs, Occ. Business, r/o. Main Road, Jamnalal Bajaj Ward, behind Ganpati Metal Works, Bhandara, Tahsil & District Bhandara ..RESPONDENTS ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. N.S. Khubalkar, counsel for petitioner.

Mr. S.V. Bhutada, for respondents.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CORA M: ROHIT B. DEO, J .

DATE : 0 6 .05.2022 ORAL JUDGMENT:

The petitioner is the plaintiff in Regular Civil Suit

195/2013, which is instituted against respondent 1 Mr. Dilip Gopaldas Duwani, seeking decree of eviction, possession and mesne profits qua the shop block 7, situated on plot 190, Jamnalal Bajaj Ward, Bhandara (“Suit Block”).

2. The petitioner – who shall be hereinafter referred to as the landlord – sought eviction of the respondent 1 – who shall be hereinafter referred to as the tenant, on the ground that the Suit Block is needed for the personal bonafide use of the landlord, and that the tenant is irregular in payment of rent.

3. The learned Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Bhandara (“Trial Court”) decreed the suit vide judgment dated 25.1.2016 and directed the tenant to deliver the vacant possession of the Suit Block to the landlord.

4. The judgment and decree of the Trial Court was assailed by the tenant in Regular Civil Appeal 19/2016, which came to be allowed by the District Judge – 1, Bhandara (“Appellate Court”), vide judgment dated 16.8.2018.

5. Aggrieved, the landlord is invoking writ and supervisory jurisdiction.

6. Pleadings:

The landlord contended that his father Mr. Sheikh Hasam owned several properties and after Mr. Sheikh Hasam expired, Regular Civil Suit 197/1994 was instituted seeking partition. The landlord was granted 2/9^th share. The tenant was a party to the partition suit, and symbolic possession of the Suit Block was given to the landlord.

The landlord then contended that after instituting certain ill advised proceedings, the suit for eviction is instituted.

The landlord is a retired employee of the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation. The landlord receives honorarium of Rs. 550/- (Rupees Five Hundred Fifty) per month and is not entitled to pension. The landlord is interested in starting general stores to augment the monthly income, and needs the Suit Block. The daughter of the landlord is married and settled at Nagpur.

The landlord further contended that the defendant is irregular in payment of rent.

The tenant resisted the eviction claim by filing written statement. The tenant denied every allegation in the suit plaint. The defendant claimed that the rent was duly sent through Money Orders which the landlord did not accept, and therefore, the tenant started depositing the rent in the bank.

The tenant contended that he has a joint family to support. The joint family is entirely dependent upon the income generated from “Ganpati Metal Work” which the tenant runs from the Suit Block.

7. Evidence adduced by the parties:

The landlord stepped into the witness box and the affidavit in lieu of the oral examination-in-chief is broadly on the lines of the plaint averments. In cross-examination, the landlord deposed that he is aged 70 years and has suffered a cardiac arrest. The landlord denied the suggestion that he is advised bed rest. The landlord accepted that on the rear side of the Suit Block, he has constructed a building in which two shop blocks are situated on the first floor and space is left open on the ground floor. The landlord volunteered that the shop blocks are