(1.) BY this appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'the code'), the appellant has challenged legality & propriety of the judgment & decree dated 23-10-92 passed by the 1st Additional District Judge, Raipur in Civil Appeal No.58A/91 allowing the civil suit by reversing the judgment & decree of dismissal of suit, dated 1-8-88 passed by the 7th Civil Judge Class-II, Raipur in Civil Suit No.98A/86. The lower appellant Court has decreed the suit under Sections 12 (1) (g) & (h) of the Chhattisgrarh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act')
(2.) THIS appeal is admitted for hearing on the following substantial question of law:- "Whether the ground u/s 12(1)(h) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 is made out, taking into consideration the effect of section 12(7) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961,"
(3.) ON the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the respondents have not filed any cross-appeal, they have filed cross- objection in which the appellant has impleaded the legal representatives of the deceased sole respondent as party and, therefore, the respondents area not required to implead themselves as legal representatives of the deceased sole respondent as party in the present Cross-objection and the cross-objection filed on behalf of the deceased sole respondent is maintainable. The respondents have proposed substantial questions of law for the decision of this appeal and the same can be considered in terms of proviso to sub-section (5) of Section 100 of the code and the appeal can be heard even without formulating any substantial question of law. Learned counsel placed reliance in the matter of Babualal and others v. Shankar Lal and others (2008) 17 SCC 638 in which the Supreme Court has held that in absence of any substantial question of law, High Court in second appeal not justified in interfering with the findings of first appellate court even if the findings were erroneous.