ANAR DEVI Vs. NATHU RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel for parties were heard by us.

(2.) Whether clause (b) of S. 23A of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (for short the Act, which confers a right on the landlord to seek recovery of possession of non-residential accommodation from his tenant on the ground specified thereunder, requires him to plead in his application to be made therefor, that he is also the owner of such accommodation and establish such ownership to succeed in that application, being a question of importance arising for our consideration in the special leave petition, the special leave to appeal sought for therein is granted.

(3.) Facts needed to decide the appeal are just a few. The respondent was a tenant of a shop, to be referred to as the accommodation under one Banarsidas who was his landlord being the owner of that accommodation. The respondent sent a notice on 23rd September, 1985 to Banarsidas calling upon him to effect certain repairs in respect of the accommodation. But, Banarsidas gave a reply to that notice telling the respondent that the appellant, his widowed daughter-in-law has since become the owner of that accommodation, she was his landlord, and as her tenant thereof, it was for him to seek the relief he wanted as regards accommodation from her.