IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY: NAGPUR BENCH: NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.4575/2008 Purushottam Patel & ors. ..vs.. Chandrashekhar Band & ors ================================== CORAM: B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE:20.10.2008 Heard Advocate Vaidya for petitioner and Advocate Bhamburkar, for respondents. Dispute is between landlord and tenant. The relationship is admitted. Both the courts have concurrently found that the landlords have proved their bonafide need. The bonafide need found to have been established is requirement of premises for the purposes of running dispensary of wife of one of the landlords and also respondent no.2 the other landord is unemployed doing petty works as carpenter. Courts have also noticed that the remaining landlord i.e. respondent no.3 was on the verge of retirement and he also needed premises for his two sons. The total area of the plot located on Ghat Road i.e. Great Nag Road is about 16800 sq.ft. The present petitioner was running a saw mill on portion thereof and that saw mill is already sealed by Forest Department and licence has not been renewed. Learned counsel for petitioner has contended that litigation in relation to saw mill is pending in this court. Advocate Bhamburkar states that, that petition is dismissed as no saw mill is now permitted to operate within 10 k.m. of reserved forest. Advocate Vaidya has also contended that as saw mill is running the aspect of comparative hardship has not been rightly adjudicated. The courts have found that saw mill is sealed and licence is not renewed. In these circumstances, there is no question of comparative hardships to the petitioner and courts have rightly considered said aspect. In view of concurrent findings no case is made out warranting interference in writ jurisdiction. Writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. JUDGE smp.