TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1992 (11) TMI 297
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e landlord. Both these appeals relate to the same building. The tenant's appeal concerns the upstairs portion of the building which was leased as residential premises, but found to be used by the tenant as a godown. The landlord's appeal concerns the lower portion of the building which was leased as business premises consisting of two shop rooms. 2. The trial court accepting the case of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r found the question regarding comparative hardship in favour of the landlord. The High Court, in revision, interfered with the findings of fact reached by the courts below and held that, notwithstanding the landlord's bona fide requirement of both the premises, the tenant was entitled to win on the ground of comparative hardship in respect of the lower portion of the building. Mr Poti relies ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... a godown. It is also not in dispute that the landlord is carrying on a business in scraps and that she bona fide requires the whole building for residence as well as business. Bona fide requirement is a question of fact. So is comparative hardship. These questions have to be decided on the basis of evidence on record. Appreciation of evidence is not the task of High Court in exercise of its revis....