.PA .1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO. 1637 OF 2003 Mohammed Usuf Abdul Karim Shaikh .. Petitioner vs Abdul Rahim Suleman Qureshi .. Respondent .. Mr.R.D.Suryavanshi for Petitioner Mr.G.S.Godbole for Respondent .. CORAM : D.G.KARNIK, J DATE: 21ST JUNE, 2004. P.C. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Both the courts below have concurrent held that the respondent landlord required the suit premises reasonably and bonafide. The courts below have also recorded a finding that the petitioner tenant had purchased other premises which he sold during the pendency of the suit and therefore he had means to acquire other property and no hardship will be caused to the petitioner. I see no reason to interfere in these concurrent findings of facts. However, by consent of the parties, it is ordered that the decree of eviction shall not be executed till 31st December, 2004 on the petitioner furnishing an undertaking of himself and of his family members in court on usual terms within four weeks from today. 3. Petition rejected. 4. Authenticated copy allowed. D.G.KARNIK, J .PA