SANTOSH KUMAR Vs. PARWATIBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The tenants-defendants having lost from both the Courts below have knocked the doors of this Court by filing this second appeal assailing the judgment and decree passed by the two Courts below for eviction on the ground envisaged under Section 12(1)(h) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (in short "the Act").

(2.) No exhaustive statement of facts are required to be narrated for the purpose of disposal of this appeal. Suffice it to say that a suit for eviction on the relationship of landlord and tenant has been filed by the landlord-respondent on the ground envisaged under Section 12(1)(h) of the Act against the appellants-defendants on the averments that their father late Mathura Prasad Pandey obtained the suit premises on tenancy basis @ Rs.12/-per month from the husband of plaintiff. The said Shri Mathura Prasad Pandey had died on 5.12.1985. After his death, the defendants have become her tenant. A notice dated 6.5.87 was sent by the plaintiff to the defendant no. 1 Santosh Kumar terminating his tenancy. In the notice, it has been mentioned that the house is in dilapidated condition and, therefore, it needs to be repaired which cannot be carried out without defendants being evicted. Thereafter, the suit was filed on 22.7.1987. Hence, it has been prayed that a decree of eviction be passed.

(3.) The defendants by filing their written statement denied the plaint averments and pleaded that neither they nor their father Mathura Prasad Pandey was the tenant of the plaintiff-respondent. Indeed, the suit property was gifted to Mathura Prasad Pandey by plaintiffs husband Raghunath Prasad Dubey in lieu of Guru-dakshina. The rate of rent Rs.12/-per month is also denied. Further it has been pleaded by the appellants that they have acquired ownership right on the suit property on account of adverse possession.