: 1 : vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.813 OF 2009 B.S. Patil & Ors ... Applicants V/s. Charlie Dominic D’souza & Ors. ... Respondents Mr.D.B. Savant for Applicants Mr.V.R. Shrivastava for Respondent Nos.2 to 6 CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: JANUARY 21, 2010 P.C.: 1. The applicants have approached this Court contending that the concurrent findings of fact recorded by both the Courts below are erroneous. It is submitted that despite the applicants having produced the money order receipts indicating payment of the rent for three months, the Courts have not accepted the same. In my opinion, the Courts have rightly refused to accept the same since the applicants have not bothered to prove the money order receipts. Mere production of the same would not suffice. The applicants were required to prove that the rent has been paid to the landlord. 2. The next submission is that the need of the landlords for the premises has diminished since one of the members of the family of the landlord has got married : 2 : and is no longer residing in the suit premises. Both the Courts below have found that the family of the respondents is growing and that they require the suit premises, bonafide. This is a finding of fact which has been arrived at by both the Courts below on appreciation of the evidence led by the parties. There is no perversity in the orders passed by the Courts below and therefore, I see no reason to interfere with the same in this Court’s revisional jurisdiction. 3. The civil revision application is therefore rejected. 4. The learned advocate for the applicants seeks some time to vacate the suit premises. The decree shall not be executed till 31.5.2010 subject to the applicants and adults in their family furnishing the usual undertaking within two weeks from today.