Sunday, 22 December 2019

Supreme Court judgment on basic concept of bonafide need

The word 'reasonable', in our view, connotes that the requirement or need is not fanciful or unreasonable. It cannot be a mere desire. The Word 'requirement' coupled with the word reasonable means that it must be something more than a mere desire but need not certainly be a compelling or absolute or dire necessity. Aitken v. Shaw (1933) S.L.T. 21; Novile v. Hordy, 90 L.J. Ch. 158. A reasonable and bona fide requirement is something in between a mere desire or wish on one hand and a compelling or dire or absolute necessity at the other end. It may be a need in presenti or within reasonable proximity in the future. The use of the word "bonafide' is an additional requirement under Section 13(1)(g) and it means that the requirement must also be honest and not be tainted with any oblique motive.

C.A. No. 5925 of 1999

Decided On: 13.10.1999

Raghunath G. Panhale Vs.  Chaganlal Sundarji and Co.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
M. Jagannadha Rao and A.P. Misra, JJ.

Citation:  1999 (2) RCR 485
Read full judgment here: Click here
Print Page

No comments:

Post a Comment