IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE APPELLATE SIDE APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 362 OF 2008 CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 362 OF 2008 CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 362 OF 2008 Digambar Ramchandra Samant. ... Applicant. V/s. Smt.Urmila Digambar Samant and others. ... Respondents. Kunal Bhanage with Vasnat Bhanage for the applicant. P.K.Dhakephalkar, senior counsel with J.G.Reddy for respondent Nos.1 to 7. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. DATED: 16th July 2008. DATED: 16th July 2008. DATED: 16th July 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: ---- ---- ---- . Heard learned counsel for the rival parties. 2. This is a revision application filed by the tenant who has suffered concurrent findings of fact and, consequently, decree of eviction on the ground of having acquired alternate accommodation and for non-user of premises for more than six months. 3. Having heard both parties at length, having seen the concurrent findings of fact recorded by both the Courts below which are supported by evidence on record, in my opinion, this is not a case wherein the Court should interfere in its revisional jurisdiction. The revision application is liable to be dismissed. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant prayed for six months time to vacate the suit premises. The learned counsel for the respondents has no objection to grant time, subject to furnishing undertaking by the applicant. Accordingly, six months time is granted to the applicant to vacate the suit premises, subject to filing usual undertaking duly signed by all the family members of the applicant within two weeks from today, failing which, the decree shall be executable and it would be open for respondent- landlords to execute the decree in accordance with law. 5. With the aforesaid observations, revision application is disposed of with no order as to costs. (V.C.DAGA, J.) (V.C.DAGA, J.) (V.C.DAGA, J.)