1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION CIVIL REVN. APPLN. NO. 14 OF 2010 Bhogilal Ratilal Shah. ... Applicant. V/s. Hasmukhlal Chunilal. ... Respondent. Mr. Piyush Shah for the Applicant. Mr. Hasmukhlal Chunilal Shah Respondent in-person. CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. DATED : 18th MARCH 2010. P.C. :- This is a Civil Revision Application filed by the Appellant – Original Plaintiff aggrieved by a Judgment and Order dated 16th September 2008. 2. The Respondent to this Petition is appearing in person. He is a senior citizen and had inducted the present Petitioner – Applicant in the Suit premises which are at Mangaldas Road, Princess Street, Bombay. 3. The Applicant filed a Suit for declaration that he is a tenant of the Respondent in the Suit premises. The whole basis is that he was inducted as a licensee and was in exclusive possession thereof. The licence being subsisting as on 7th February 1973, He should be declared as a tenant. 2 Concurrently, it has been found that the case as set up is not proved. On the other hand, the Applicant/Petitioner was brought in on purely gratuitous basis by the Respondent. Being known and related to each other that the business was jointly carried on for some time. 4. There is no reason to interfere with the concurrent findings of fact, when there is no perversity or error of jurisdiction pointed out. In these circumstances, the Civil Revision Application is dismissed. 5. At this stage, Mr. Shah, learned Advocate appearing for the Applicant states that the Applicant be given one year’s time to vacate the premises. This statement is made by Mr. Shah, learned Advocate appearing for the Applicant, after seeking instructions from him and when he is fully aware of the fact that the Respondent’s Suit for his eviction was earlier dismissed and that dismissal has become final. Yet, the Applicant undertakes to this Court that he would vacate and hand over vacant and peaceful possession of the suit premises to the Respondent Hasmukhlal Chunilal. 6. The request of time to vacate of one year is opposed by the Respondent before me. Considering the matter in its totality, interest of justice would be served if the Applicant is given time till 31st August 2010 provided he gives an undertaking to this Court within three weeks from today stating therein in clear terms that after this period is over, he 3 would hand over vacant and peaceful possession of the suit premises to the Respondent. Needless to state that in default, by the Applicant to file an undertaking or to vacate as stated before me, in addition to proceeding in contempt, the Respondent will be at liberty to seek police assistance to evict the Applicant from the premises. The Revision Application is dismissed subject to above. (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.)