GULABBAI vs NALIN NARSI VOHRA AND ORS.

The Supreme Court ruled that under the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947, specifically Sections 12(2), 12(3)(a), and 13(1)(a), additional evidence regarding bona fide need is admissible. The Court established that the necessity for the premises must be genuine and reasonable, affirming the Trial Court's decision that the plaintiff required the premises for her husband's office as he had no other accommodation. The appeal by the defendants was dismissed, upholding the eviction order.