1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.404 OF 2009 Mr.John Baburao parimal since deceased through LRs ..Appellants V/s Shri Shyamnarayan Ramkhelvan Rajbhar & Ors. ..Respondents ---- Mr. R.R.Salvi for the appellants. ---- Coram : R.S.MOHITE,J Date : 20th August, 2009. PC 1 This is a revision filed by the original defendants against concurrent decrees of eviction passed by the Courts below. The lower court has decreed the suit filed by the plaintiff for eviction on the ground of willful default in payment of rent. The only point argued is that in respect of the suit property which is, according to the plaintiff situated in CTS No.823 the defendant was not the tenant but was the owner. It appears to be the admitted position that defendant also has a chawl situated in CTS No.829 which is adjacent to CTS No.823. It is also an admitted position that two chawls are separated by a lane. The courts below have negatived the defendant’s contention that he is the owner in respect of the suit property. The record indicates that in respect of CTS No.823 an earlier suit was filed by the father of the plaintiff by name Ramkhelwan Rajbhar and this suit which was for eviction being R.A.E Suit No.5681/1975 came to be decreed by an order dated 15.4.1981. 2 Against this decree, present defendants have preferred an Appeal bearing No.421/2008. The same was also dismissed on 1.3.1988. Plaintiffs have produced these decrees at the stage of evidence. Since the premises in these decrees are the suit premises, the trial Court has dis-believed the defendant’s contention that he is the owner of the suit premises. No fault can be found with the judgment and decrees passed by the lower Courts. Hence, revision is rejected. (R.S.MOHITE,J) 3