1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No. 4901 OF 2009. ( Kamalsing Ramsing Bais -: versus :- Smt. Shakuntala N. Randive ) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : DECEMBER 17, 2009. Heard Shri N.A. Vyawahare, learned counsel for the petitioner-tenant and Shri R.M. Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent-landlady. The Courts below have found that, respondent landlady has proved her bonafide need. The need proved is to shift to Nagpur to engage her son in business of general goods/daily needs. Learned counsel for petitioner has argued that the landlady did not enter witness box and she made attempts to sale the property and there was advertisement for that purpose and lastly that the house is for residential purpose and cannot be used for commercial purpose. During arguments, learned counsel for petitioner has pointed out that the husband of landlady accepted in his cross examination that there was an advertisement for sale of suit property. However, perusal of the said cross 2 examination further reveals that, he stated that, though such advertisement was issued, the landlady was not interested in selling the property. Similarly, the contention that, property is meant for residential purpose is not relevant at this stage. The landlady herself is old and she has examined her husband, power of attorney. Learned counsel for petitioner has pointed out that in some of the documents her age is stated to be 50 years only. Looking to the nature of need pleaded and the material on record, it is apparent that the examination of husband in such circumstances is sufficient to to show/ establish the need. No case is made out warranting interference in writ jurisdiction. Writ Petition is thus, dismissed, with no order as to costs. JUDGE Rgd.