JAYANT THAKKAR Vs. REHANA REYAZUDDIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The substantial question of law involved, formulated and to be answered in this defendant's second appeal is as under: -

(2.) The plaintiff instituted a suit for eviction of the defendant tenant on the ground that she is the landlady of the suit accommodation and the said accommodation was let-out to the defendant on monthly rent of Rs. 1,680/- in which the defendant was earlier running Kumar Engineer Works. The tenancy is monthly which was extended from time to time, but since the defendant failed to pay rent from July, 2015, his tenancy was terminated vide notice dated 23-4-2005 stating that the suit accommodation is required bona fidely for the landlady's son for opening a shop, as he is the Director of S.R. Shoes Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata, and her son has been appointed as distributor of the said company for which 3,000 sq.ft. land is required and for the said purpose, the plaintiff has no other alternative accommodation in the township of Bilaspur, therefore, the suit accommodation is bona fidely required for non-residential purpose / opening shop of her son at Bilaspur under Section 12(1) (f) of the Chhattisgarh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act of 1961').

(3.) The defendant by filing written statement denied the averments made in the plaint and also amended the written statement pursuant to the order dated 5-5-2007 holding the documents Exs.P1 & P-2 as null and void and further averred that the plaintiff has other accommodations in the township of Bilaspur which she has let-out as such, the suit accommodation is not required bona fidely by the plaintiff and as such, the suit deserves to be dismissed.