In Brief
Landlords filed a suit to recover possession of a tenanted shop on grounds of bona fide requirement, change in usage, and willful default. The trial court and district court decreed the suit, finding genuine bona fide requirement. The High Court reversed these findings in revision. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and set aside the High Court's order. The Court held that the High Court exceeded its revisional jurisdiction by interfering with concurrent factual findings. The sale of the premises to existing tenants supported the inference of genuine bona fide requirement. Concurrent findings cannot be reversed in revision unless jurisdictional error exists. Six months' time was granted to vacate.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.