In Brief
A widow abandoned by her husband sought eviction of a tenant from premises let to him, claiming need for her unemployed son to start a business to support the family. The trial court found genuine need and granted eviction, but the High Court reversed, finding that the son was not examined as a witness. The Supreme Court held that 'own occupation' in rent control law extends to family members and that a landlord need not examine the family member if genuine need is otherwise established. The Court distinguished between mere desire and genuine need, finding the latter present here given the landlord's unemployment, desertion, and the son's lack of employability. The appeals were allowed and eviction decreed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.