S.B. Civil Second Appeal No.138/05 Date:18/09/2008 HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE ASHOK PARIHAR Mr. G.K. Garg, for appellants. Mr. Man Singh Chudawat, for respondent. BY THE COURT: Suit for eviction filed by the plaintiff- respondent was decreed by the trial court vide judgment and decree dated 13.11.1990. The above judgment and decree passed by the trial court has further been affirmed by the lower appellate court vide judgment dated 19.1.2005. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I have carefully gone through the material on record. On the basis of concurrent findings of fact though benefit of first default has been given to the defendant- appellants, however, decree of eviction has been passed on the ground of bonafide necessity. While deciding issue of bonafide necessity, the issue of comparative hardship has also been decided against the defendant-appellants. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the issue of partial eviction has not been considered by the courts below. However, as per material available on record in view of nature of bonafide necessity, in my opinion, the partial eviction in the present matter is neither feasible nor, possible. Since after due consideration proper discretion has already been used by both the courts below, in the facts and circumstances, no further interference is called for by this court, moreso, when no substantial question of law arises. However, in the interest of justice, the defendant-appellants may now vacate the suit premises on or before 1.12.2008. The defendant-appellants shall continue to pay monthly rent till the date of vacation of the suit premises. An undertaking in this regard be submitted by the defendant-appellants before the trial court within 15 days. In case of violation of any of the conditions of undertaking, the plaintiff-respondent shall be free to execute the decree passed by the courts below in accordance with law. With the above liberty and directions, the appeal is disposed of accordingly. (Ashok Parihar) J.