As per case facts, the landlord filed an eviction suit for premises tenant based on reasonable requirement. The trial court decreed eviction, but the appellate court reversed it, concluding the ... plaintiff had alternative accommodation by being a co-sharer in other properties. The plaintiff appealed to the High Court. The High Court decided preliminary questions regarding plaintiff's ownership of the suit property (affirming it) and non-ownership of other properties. The tenant appealed this High Court order to the Supreme Court. The question arose whether the High Court correctly determined the plaintiff's sole ownership of the suit property and lack of co-sharership in other properties. Finally, the Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition, finding no merit, thus affirming the High Court's preliminary findings and allowing the High Court to proceed with the final question of reasonable requirement.