1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR. ::: JUDGMENT Bhanwar Lal vs. Kesari Mal. S.B.CIVIL SECOND APPEAL NO.126/2004 UNDER SECTION 100 CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 29.7.2003 PASSED BY SMT. SHOBHA CHAUDHARY, ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE NO.2, BHILWARA IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.3/1997. DATE OF JUDGMENT ::: 12.4.2006 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr. S Singh, for the appellant. Mr. S Saruparia, for the respondent. - - - - - BY THE COURT: Heard learned counsel for the parties. The plaintiff/appellant's suit for eviction of his tenant/defendant was dismissed by the two courts below. The eviction of the tenant was sought on the ground of personal bonafide necessity of the landlord's son. Both the courts 2 below found that the appellant has alternate suitable accommodation for doing the business of his son. This concurrent finding of fact is based on evidence and I do not find that the courts below have committed any error of law. In view of the above, I do not find that any substantial question of law arises in this appeal, therefore, this appeal deserves to be dismissed, hence, dismissed. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. S.Phophaliya