RAM SEWAK Vs. CHAKRESH KUMAR JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is defendants' second appeal under Section 100, CPC. The following substantial question of law was formulated by this Court by order dated 13-8-1999 at the time of admission of this appeal:-

(2.) THE facts relevant for the decision of the question referred to above are that defendant No. 1 Ramsevak was tenant of Konsabai in the suit accommodation. She has bequeathed this house to plaintiff Dr. Chakresh Kumar Jain by registered Will dated 14-5-1991. Thus the plaintiff has become the owner of this house after the death of the testator on 3-6-1991 and defendant No. 1 Ramsevak became his tenant.

(3.) THE plaintiffs suit for eviction has been decreed under Section 12 (1) (c), (f) and (g) of the M. P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act' ). The plaintiffs case was that the defendant No. 1 has denied his title to the suit accommodation and, therefore, he has become liable to eviction. It has been further pleaded by the plaintiff that he requires the suit accommodation, which had been let out to the defendant No. 1 for non-residential purpose, for starting his dispensary and for this purpose he has no other reasonably suitable non-residential accommodation of his own in the city. He has stated that at present he is running his dispensary in a rented accommodation. It has also been pleaded that the suit house has become unfit for human habitation and it requires reconstruction.