resonable and bonafied requirment
mahendra rai jain
(Querist) 15 February 2009
This query is : Resolved
Sir,
a landlord file a case against tenant for evection of shop for his son's resonable and bonafied necesity for transport business but did not present him as a witness.
so that my Question is this..
kya tenant is ground par safal hoga..ki landlord ki necessity resonable nahi hai.. if there any citation is available in this regard plz suggest me
Kiran Kumar
(Expert) 15 February 2009
well in opinion it is the duty of every parent to settle his son professionaly.
the son may not appear as witness...testimony of the landlord is enough.
his necessasity seems to be reasonable.
Sushil Kumar Bhatia
(Expert) 15 February 2009
Lanlord"s need to settle his unemployed son in transport business is genuine,hard pressing and bonafide in this situation the tenant should search other place otherwise there is chance of his eviction on this ground and landlord can win his case
AEJAZ AHMED
(Expert) 15 February 2009
MR. MAHENDRA,
Eviction of the 'TENANT' is sought by the 'LAND-LORD' on the ground of 'Bonafied & reasonable Requirement'.
Well, as you are on behalf of the 'TENANT', so it is your duty to save him from 'EVICTION' from the premises in question.
Few guidance from me in this situation to you as:
As the 'bonafied requirement' of the 'Landlord' is to "Establish a business of Transportation for his son".
(a) Whether the Landlord filed any "DOCUMENTS" along with the case 'at the time of filing' about the 'proposed transportation business'
(b) Whether, he mentioned in the Petition (i) about the details of 'proposed business' (ii) present activity, work and experience of said son.
(c) If, there is no such documentary and material evidence about the ' Proposed Business' in the case. Then, you can get few favourable decesions of several High Courts.
Further, what about his any other properties;
(i) whether he is having this ' only shop'
(ii) OR any other properties on his (Landlord's) or his son's name.
(iii) If so, you ask your client to enquire about their other properties.
(iv) If they are having any other shops/Mulgi on their name,
(v) Then why this eviction case against only tenant.
This other benefit also you can take for your client.
K.C.Suresh
(Expert) 16 February 2009
I also agree with my learned friends.
A. A. JOSE
(Expert) 16 February 2009
All above views are right and I support.
Kamlesh soni
(Expert) 18 February 2009
I agree with my learned friends.
mahendra rai jain
(Querist) 19 February 2009
thank you very much sir
it is very usful guidline for me to argu the case..
PALNITKAR V.V.
(Expert) 20 February 2009
The Experts have really given a good solution. I respectfully agree with their views.