: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.29 OF 2008 Sam Kondaram Deolaliwala ..Applicant. Vs. Eudhabhai Taherbhai Rangwala & Ors. ..Respondents. Mr.P.K.Dhakephalkar, Senior Counsel i/b.Mr.Niranjan Shimpi for the Applicant. Mr.Ashok Tajane for the Respondents. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATED : 24TH APRIL, 2008 DATED : 24TH APRIL, 2008 DATED : 24TH APRIL, 2008 P.C. : P.C. : P.C. : I am not inclined to interfere with the concurrent findings of fact. Both the lower Courts have come to the conclusion that a decree for eviction is liable to be passed on the ground of sub-letting and permanent alterations. 2. Mr.Dhakephalkar submitted that despite the fact that there are no cross-objections, the Appellate Bench had also held against the Defendant on the ground of default in the payment of rent. I would ignore that ground for the moment. 3. Both the Courts below have analysed and : 2 : considered the evidence regarding the illegal sub-letting and the permanent alterations adequately and, with respect, correctly. 4. For instance, the Courts have come to the conclusion that in the five portions of the suit premises there has been an illegal sub-letting to a travel agent, a pan shop, a tailor and a gram vendor. 5. It is difficult to accept the contention that the occupants of these stalls were the employees of the tenant. The tenant has adduced no evidence whatsoever to establish the same. If the tenant had such varied businesses and business interests, he ought to have produced some evidence to establish that the business carried on therein was on his behalf. It is extremely important to note that none of the persons who were manning the stalls have been examined. If they were the tenant’s employees, surely, the first thing he would have done was to examine them. 6. Even assuming that the tenant had established that he had obtained permission for putting up a rolling shutters on the stalls, there is nothing to : 3 : indicate that the permission has been granted by the landlords for the other structural alterations including in respect of the loft. 7. It is not necessary therefore to deal with the various other aspects of the evidence which both the Court have dealt with in detail. 8. In the circumstances, the Civil Revision Application is dismissed. The time to vacate is extended upto 31.8.2008 subject to the Applicant filing the usual undertaking within four weeks from today in this Court including that in the event of the Applicant not succeeding before the Supreme Court, he will comply with the decree by handing over vacant and possession of the premises. ***