RAJNARAYAN Vs. CHANDA BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The substantial questions of law involved, formulated and to be answered in second appeal preferred by the plaintiffs are as under:-

(2.) Three plaintiffs filed a suit for eviction of the defendants/tenants on the ground enumerated under Sec. 12(1) (a), (c), (e) and (h) of the Chhattisgarh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 stating inter-alia that the suit accommodation was earlier held by Maikulal Nigam and they have purchased the same from Maikulal Nigam by three registered sale deeds dtd. 24/9/1985 vide Exs.P-1, P-16 and P-17 and thereafter notices Exs.P-5, P-10, P-11, P-12 and P-13 were served to defendants No.1 to 3/tenants intimating them that they have purchased the suit accommodation and came in possession of the suit accommodation and they have become landlord/owner, but despite service of notice they have not paid arrears of rent and they have let-out the suit accommodation to defendant No.4 unauthorizedly and without prior consent of the plaintiffs and they (defendants) have created nuisance. The suit accommodation is required bona fide by the plaintiffs for residential purpose as they have no reasonably suitable alternative accommodation of their own in the township of Raipur, as such, decree for eviction be passed in their favour.

(3.) The defendants filed their written statement and denied the title of the plaintiffs stating inter-alia that Maikulal Nigam had no right and title over the suit accommodation and the defendants are in possession as owner of the suit accommodation and they have also pleaded the plea of adverse possession over the suit accommodation and as such, the suit deserves to be dismissed.