CRA/3/2008 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION No. 3 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? -Yes. 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? -No. 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? -No. 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? -No. 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? -No. ========================================================= PRANLAL JIVANLAL SANGHVI - Applicant(s) Versus BHAICHAND AMULAKH SHAH SINCE DECD. THROUGH HEIRS - Opponent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR MJ PARIKH for Applicant(s) : 1, MR JIGAR M PATEL for Opponent(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI Date : 28/08/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner-original defendant has challenged the judgment and order dated 5/10/2007 passed by CRA/3/2008 2/4 JUDGMENT the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.1, Surendranagar in Regular Civil Appeal No.13 of 2000 whereby the learned Appellate Court has allowed the appeal of the appellant and quashed and set aside the order of the Trial Court dated 31/3/2000 passed in Civil Suit No.148 of 1995 whereby the Trial Court after considering the evidence on record has passed eviction decree on the ground of non-user. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent had filed Regular Civil Suit No.148 of 1995 in the Court of Civil Judge (JD), Surendranagar for recovery of possession as well as arrears of rent on the ground of non-user and subletting. The Trial Court dismissed the said suit qua possession and directed the petitioner to pay arrears of rent of Rs.1,320/-. Against the said decree the respondent filed Regular Civil Appeal No.13 of 2000 in the District Court, Surendranagar. The learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.1 vide judgment and decree dated 5/10/2007 allowed the appeal and granted the prayers as made in para 8 of the plaint. It is against the said judgment and decree of the Appellate Court the present Revision Application has been filed. 3. Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the premises were in use and there was a compromise decree between the parties. He submitted that the Lower Appellate Court has erred CRA/3/2008 3/4 JUDGMENT in holding that the rented premises was required for bona fide and personal use of the respondent. 4. Learned Advocate for the respondent has submitted that the Lower Appellate Court has considered all the facts and circumstances of the case and no case is made out to cause interference. 5. As a result of hearing and perusal of the record, it is found that there is a clear finding of arrears of rent and non-user of the premises. The Lower Appellate Court has in detail discussed the issues before coming to such conclusion which cannot be assailed in any manner whatsoever. 6. I am in complete agreement with the reasonings given by the Appellate Court and condition of the rented premises was not proper and the Court has believed the hardship of the landlord and in that view of the matter, the decree passed by the Appellate Court is just and proper. 7. In the premises, present Civil Revision Application deserves to be dismissed. Hence, the same is dismissed. No order as to costs. 8. However, if undertaking is filed within two weeks, time to vacate CRA/3/2008 4/4 JUDGMENT the premises is granted up to 15/11/2008. (K.S.JHAVERI, J.) (ila)