B B YADU Vs. AMITA VAIDHYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The tenant-petitioner has filed this revision under section 23-E of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') challenging the order dated 30.12.2008 passed by the Rent Controlling Authority (RCA), Jabalpur allowing the application filed by landlady under section 23-A of the Act directing ejectment from the suit house.

(2.) The facts in brief are that landlady Smt. Amita Vaidya has filed an application under Section 23-A of the Act being widow, falls within the special category of the 'landlord' under Section 23-J (iii) of the Act inter alia contending that she is the owner of the house situated in Mouja Kachhpura, Number Bandobast 501, Patwari Halka No.25, Khasra No.457, Plot No.9, area 2730 sq. ft. whereupon the house on 821 sq. ft. has been constructed and its new number is 55/1, Veer Savarkar Ward, Jabalpur. The said land was purchased by her by a registered sale deed dated 26.07.1989 and thereafter the house was constructed wherein the petitioner is the tenant. After the death of her husband she started to reside in the ancestral house of the in-laws along with her 3 sons who were minor. Now the brother-in-law (Jeth) of the respondent does not want to allow her to stay in the ancestral house. More so, the accommodation is not sufficient looking to the age of 3 sons who are now marriageable. Thus, in the aforesaid circumstances, she requires to get the accommodation in question vacated which is on the tenancy of the petitioner. It is said that the suit house is required bona fide to which no other reasonably suitable accommodation is available to the respondent, therefore, prayed for eviction of the suit house.

(3.) The petitioner-tenant by filing written statement has denied the plaint allegations and it is averred that the house in which the respondent at present is residing is sufficient to satisfy her need. More so a house was given to her in Kanyadan by her father in marriage which is also available to satisfy their need. In such circumstances on account of having alternative reasonably suitable accommodation the case has been filed on the false pretext because she wants to sale out the suit house. In view of the foregoing, prayer was made to dismiss the application.