PREMWATI WD/O SALIKRAM Vs. SITARAM JAGANNATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER, Premyati, is present in person in Court today and has presented the petition under Article 225 of the Constitution of India. Let it be registered as Misc. Petition. Ku. Alka Nadkar, Advocate, appears in this matter as amicus curlae to assist the court.

(2.) AN old lady, a widow, aged about 70 years, the petitioner is. At this age even she is required to earn her livelihood as a wage-earner because her tenant, Sitaram is not paying her rent. On the other hand, it is he who is trying to evict her and alienate her house. He has disconnected her water and light facilities and is threatening and terrorising her to leave the place. These are averments we read in this petition. At one stage we had taken the view that a direction has to be made to the police authorities to give the petitioner protection by drawing up proceedings Under Section 117, Criminal Pocedure Code against her tenant, Sitaram son of Jagannath. We, however , are concerned in this matter with the real-life problem of a destitute and we Cannot ignore the groused realities. That direction may not suffice and the petitioner may continue to suffer deprivation and terror at the hands of her tenant, Sitaram and his sons, who are sharing the accommodation with her in the same house. Thus, we address ourselves to the question of ensuring what appropriate and real relief the petitioner needs and how to give that.

(3.) ON facts which have come before us, stated by the petitioner, we propose to take the view that a case for eviction of respondent, Sitaram, from the premises in question can be made out by her Under Section 23-A read with Section 23-J of the M. P. Accommodation Control Act, for short, the Act. Before us, the petitioner has made statement that her son is employed elsewhere but had left his family with her and as a result of the highhanded action and terror struck by the tenant, Sitaram, her son's family had to leave the place to stay elsewhere. She has, therefore, bona fide requirement of the house not only for her residence but also for residence of other members of her family, who have no accommodation of their own in Morena, where the house is situate. Even otherwise, it appears to us that requirement of the petitioner is bona fide to evict the tenant who is creating a terror and has made her life miserable in her own houseof which she has let out a part to the unwieldy and overbearing tenant. Only a law-abiding tenant, placably possessing the accommodation let out, is entitled to pray for leave Under Section 23-C of the Act to oppose eviction.